Submission for Review: Questionnaire for National Security Positions, SF 86, 50260-50263 [E9-23711]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
50260
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The
PDR reproduction contractor will copy
documents for a fee.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 3rd day
of September, 2009.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
Peter J. Habighorst,
Chief, Fuel Manufacturing Branch, Fuel
Facilities Licensing Directorate, Division of
Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E9–23572 Filed 9–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2008–0643]
Draft Regulatory Guide: Public Meeting
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of Public Meeting on
Draft Regulatory Guide, DG–1203.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert G. Roche-Rivera, Project
manager, Structural Geotechnical and
Seismic Engineering Branch, Division of
Engineering, Office of Nuclear
Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001. Telephone: (301) 251–
7645; fax number: (301) 521–7420; email: Robert.Roche@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
I. Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) has revised Draft
Guide 1203 considering NRC staff
recommendations and public
comments. This Draft Guide, originally
entitled, ‘‘Containment Performance for
Pressure Loads’’, describes methods that
the staff of the NRC considers
acceptable for evaluating containment
structural integrity under internal
pressurization above design pressure, in
accordance with regulatory
requirements and Commission’s
performance goals for containment
structures under internal pressurization.
II. Further Information
The NRC staff invites the public for a
meeting to discuss the revised Draft
Guide 1203. This is a Category 2
Meeting. The public is invited to
participate in this meeting by discussing
regulatory issues with the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) at
designated points on the agenda. The
meeting will take place on Thursday
October 8, 2009 from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.
at the following location:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:56 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
• U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Church Street Building,
Room CSB–6B1, 21 Church Street,
Rockville, MD 20850.
Interested members of the public can
also participate in the meeting via a tollfree teleconference. For details, please
call the meeting contact listed above.
The NRC provides reasonable
accommodations to individuals with
disabilities where appropriate. If you
need a reasonable accommodation to
participate in this meeting (e.g., sign
language), or need this meeting notice or
other information from the meeting in
another format (e.g., Braille, large print),
please notify the NRC’s meeting contact.
Determinations on requests for
reasonable accommodation will be
made on a case-by-case basis.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day
of September, 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Rosemary T. Hogan,
Chief, Structural Geotechnical and Seismic
Engineering Branch, Division of Engineering,
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
Agenda for Public Meeting Regarding
Draft Regulatory Guide DG–1203:
Containment Performance for Pressure
Loads
1 p.m.–4 p.m. Thursday October, 8,
2009, NRC, Church Street Building,
Rockville, MD (Room CSB–6B1).
1–1:10 Introduction and Opening
Remarks;
1:10–1:50 Presentation—Overview of
revised Draft Guide 1203 and
resolution to public comments;
1:50–2 Break;
2–4 Discussion on Draft Guide 1203;
4 Adjourn.
[FR Doc. E9–23571 Filed 9–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
Submission for Review: Questionnaire
for National Security Positions, SF 86
AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: 30-Day Notice and request for
comments.
SUMMARY: The Federal Investigative
Services Division (FISD), U.S. Office of
Personnel Management (OPM) offers the
general public and other Federal
agencies the opportunity to comment on
an information collection request (ICR),
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Control No. 3206–0005, for the
General Request for the Questionnaire
for National Security Positions, (SF 86).
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
As required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, (Pub. L. 104–13,
44 U.S.C. chapter 35) as amended by the
Clinger-Cohen Act (Pub. L. 104–106),
OPM is soliciting comments for this
collection. The Office of Management
and Budget is particularly interested in
comments that:
1. Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
2. Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
3. Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
4. Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submissions
of responses.
DATES: Comments are encouraged and
will be accepted until October 30, 2009.
This process is conducted in accordance
with 5 CFR part 1320.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit written comments on
the proposed information collection to
the FISD, OPM, 1900 E. Street, NW.,
Room 2H31, Washington, DC 20415,
Attention: MaryKay Brewer or sent via
electronic mail to
SFRevisionComments@opm.gov; and
Jasmeet K. Seehra, OMB Desk Officer,
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, New Executive Office Building,
725 17th Street, NW., Room 10235,
Washington, DC 20503.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A
copy of this ICR, with applicable
supporting documentation, and/or a
copy of the Change Matrix described in
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, below,
may be obtained by contacting the FISD,
OPM, 1900 E. Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20503, Attention: MaryKay Brewer
or sent via electronic mail to
MaryKay.Brewer@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
notice announces that OPM submitted
to OMB a request for review and
clearance of the revised collection of
information, Questionnaire for National
Security Positions SF 86 (OMB Control
No. 3206–0005), which includes e-QIP
(Electronic Questionnaires for
Investigations Processing).
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
Previously, OPM requested OMB
review and clear a suite of investigative
forms that were packaged under OMB
Control No. 3206–0005 and included
the Questionnaire for National Security
Positions, SF 86. Due to the continuing
Executive and congressional interest in
improving and streamlining the
processes by which security clearances
are granted, OMB has granted a request
by OPM to review and clear the various
expiring investigative forms separately
so as to move forward at this time with
the Questionnaire for National Security
Positions, SF 86.
The SF 86 will be used by the U.S.
Government in conducting background
investigations, reinvestigations, and
continuous evaluations, as appropriate,
of persons under consideration for or
retention in national security positions
as defined in 5 CFR part 732 and for
positions requiring eligibility for access
to classified information under
Executive Order 12968. This form may
also be used by agencies in determining
whether a subject performing work for
or on behalf of the Government under a
contract should be deemed eligible for
logical or physical access when the
nature of the work to be performed is
sensitive and could bring about an
adverse effect on the national security.
It is estimated that 21,800 non-Federal
individuals will complete the SF 86
annually. Each form takes
approximately 150 minutes to complete.
The estimated annual burden is 54,500
hours. e-QIP is a Web-based system
application that currently houses an
electronic version of the SF 86. This
Internet data collection tool provides
faster processing time and immediate
data validation to ensure accuracy of the
respondent’s personal information. The
e-Government initiative mandates that
agencies utilize e-QIP for all
investigations and reinvestigations. A
variable in assessing burden hours is the
nature of the electronic application. The
electronic application includes
branching questions and instructions
which provide for a tailored collection
from the respondent based on varying
factors in the respondent’s personal
history. The burden on the respondent
is reduced when the respondent’s
personal history is not relevant to a
particular question, since the question
branches, or expands for additional
details, only for those persons who have
pertinent information to provide
regarding that line of questioning. As
such, the burden on the respondent will
vary depending on whether the
information collection relates to the
respondent’s personal history.
Additionally, once entered, a
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:56 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
respondent’s complete and certified
investigative data remain secured in the
e-QIP system until the next time the
respondent is sponsored by an agency to
complete a new investigative form.
Upon initiation, the respondent’s
previously entered data (except ‘yes/no’
questions) will populate a new
investigative request and the respondent
will be allowed to update their
information and certify the data. In this
instance, time to complete the form is
reduced significantly.
The 60-day Federal Register Notice
was published June 23, 2008 (Volume
73, Number 121, pages 35421–35422).
The notice proposed to change the SF
86 to specify continuous evaluation as
a purpose of the form and a part of the
investigative process. The
‘‘Authorization for Release of
Information’’ was amended to
acknowledge that the information
provided may be used to conduct
officially sanctioned and approved
personnel security-related research and
studies. The authorization language was
amended to change the period the
authorization remains in effect from (up
to) five years to an unspecified period
so long as the respondent remains
employed in a sensitive position
requiring access to classified
information. The Fair Credit Reporting
Disclosure and Authorization Form was
made part of the proposed SF 86 as
required under OMB Terms of
Clearance. It is important to note that at
the time the Federal Register notice was
posted in June 2008, agencies were still
utilizing the 1995 version of the form as
the version in use today had not yet
been implemented.
The following Federal agencies,
agency components and multi-agency
working groups made comments during
the public comment period following
the 60-day Notice: Social Security
Administration, Joint Security and
Suitability Reform Team (JRT),
Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Department of Health and
Human Services, U.S. Agency for
International Development, Department
of Homeland Security (DHS), Central
Intelligence Agency, Department of
Transportation, Director of National
Intelligence (DNI), Department of State
(DOS), Department of State Mental
Health Services, Federal Bureau of
Investigation, Defense Personnel
Security Research Center, Department of
Energy (DOE), and internal
commentators from the U.S. Office of
Personnel Management (OPM). OPM
internal commentators mostly focused
on administrative issues related to the
formatting of the instructions and layout
of the questions on the former paper
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
50261
collection. Most comments from
agencies other than the JRT focused on
changes to the collection of mental
health treatment information relative to
treatment resulting from service in a
military combat environment. The JRT
comments focused on collecting from
the respondent more accurate and
relevant information of investigative
and adjudicative significance earlier in
the investigative process, to wit at the
time the respondent completes the form,
and the JRT recommended expanded
branching questions in most sections of
the form to collect additional details.
A 30-day Federal Register Notice was
published December 31, 2008 (Volume
73, Number 251, pages 80445–80447).
This notice proposed an SF 86 that
incorporated the significant and
substantial changes to the lines of
questioning recommended in the
comments by the JRT. Section 9,
Citizenship, was changed to collect
additional information that will assist in
verifying citizenship of respondents
born outside of the U.S. Branching
questions inserted after each response
tailored the elicitation of information to
the respondent’s personal history.
Section 10, Dual/Multiple Citizenship,
was expanded to include broader
questions designed to elicit information
pertinent to the adjudicative guideline
for Foreign Preference. At Section 11,
Where You Have Lived, branching
questions replaced detailed instructions
for all respondents and instead tailored
the collection to elicit information based
on the respondent’s relevant personal
history. Additional contact information
for the residence reference was added to
assist investigation. At Section 12,
Where You Went To School, the
instructions were changed to require 7
years of information vice 10 regarding
certain educational activities and the
verbiage was changed regarding listing
degrees or diplomas received more than
7 years ago to be consistent with
changes to the investigative standards.
At Section 13a, Employment Activities,
branching questions were added to
reduce detailed instructions for all
respondents and tailor instructions as
applicable to the respondent. ‘‘Code 9—
Non-government employment
(excluding self-employment)’’ was
added to the employment types for
clarity. Additionally, branching
questions for foreign addresses and
contacts were added to assist
investigation. At Section 13c,
Employment Record, branching
questions were added to prompt the
applicant to enter the required
information following each positive
response, thereby simplifying the
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
50262
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
detailed instructions previously
necessary. The requirement to specify
whether the respondent was laid off
from a job was deleted as this
information was not pertinent to the
adjudicative guidelines regarding
personal conduct and handling
protected information that drive the
Employment Record section. At Section
15, Military Service, branching
questions were added to collect more
specific details pertinent to the Personal
Conduct and Criminal Conduct
adjudicative guidelines. Branching
question were added to elicit more
information regarding foreign military
service to obtain information pertinent
to the adjudicative guidelines for
Foreign Influence and Foreign
Preference. At Section 16, People Who
Know You Well, branching questions
were added to clarify and collect
additional information pertaining to the
references. At Section 17, instructions
were branched to assist investigations,
and the definition of ‘‘cohabitant’’ was
clarified. Section 18 was reformatted for
branching questions and ‘‘Visa’’ was
added to the listing of types of
documentation to support investigation.
At Section 19, Foreign Activities,
‘‘influence’’ replaced ‘‘common
interests’’ for clarity regarding
relationships with foreign nationals.
Branching questions were added to
obtain additional information pertaining
to foreign connections and the
approximate frequency of contact to
support the Foreign Influence
adjudicative guideline. At Section 20,
additional questions regarding foreign
financial activities, foreign real estate,
and receipt of benefits from a foreign
country, including questions concerning
the subject’s immediate family
members, were added to elicit
information pertinent to the Foreign
Influence guideline. Additional
questions regarding foreign
employment, business ventures, travel,
and foreign government contacts,
including questions concerning the
subject’s immediate family members,
were added to elicit information
pertinent to the Foreign Influence,
Foreign Preference, and Outside
Activities adjudicative guidelines. At
Question 21, additional branching
questions were added to elicit
information regarding mental health
conditions and treatment pertinent to
the adjudicative guideline for
Psychological Conditions, including
questions about counseling or treatment
providers, whether treatment was on an
in-patient basis, whether admission was
voluntary, and whether the subject was
ever adjudicated as mentally
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:56 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
incompetent. At Section 22, Police
Record, branching questions were added
to inquire about the disposition of
criminal proceedings, and to inquire
about offenses related to firearms,
explosives, alcohol and drugs for a 7
year period vice an unlimited period
pertaining to the respondent’s entire
life. At Section 23, Illegal Use of Drugs
or Drug Activity, questions were added
regarding intent of future use and drug
treatment pertinent to the adjudicative
guideline for Drug Involvement. The
requirement to report possession of
drugs was replaced with a broader
collection requiring reporting of illegal
purchase. At Section 24, Use of Alcohol,
questions were branched to further
identify actions taken by applicant to
pursue and/or complete recommended
counseling/treatment and to elicit
pertinent information regarding the
adjudicative guideline for Alcohol
Consumption. At Section 25,
Investigations and Clearance Record,
branching questions were added to elicit
information necessary for investigation
to obtain relevant prior records and to
elicit information potentially connected
to the adjudicative guideline for
Handling Protected Information.
Additionally, questions regarding
investigations by foreign governments
were added to elicit information
pertinent to the adjudicative guideline
for Foreign Preference. At Section 26,
Financial Record, branching questions
were added to elicit specific detailed
information pertaining to each financial
area instead of an open text field for
respondents to provide explanation. The
time frame for reporting delinquencies
on any debt was changed to 120 days,
instead of 180 days for prior debts and
90 days for current debts. A question
was added regarding involvement with
a credit counseling service to support
the adjudicative guideline for Financial
Considerations. At Section 28,
Involvement in Non-Criminal Court
Actions, the time period respondents
are required to report was changed to
the last 7 years vice 10. At Section 29,
Association Record, branching
questions were added to collect detailed
information versus providing a blank
area for explanation. The Certification
Statement was amended to remove
verbiage regarding security clearance to
clarify penalties for incomplete or
inaccurate statements. On the medical
release, a question was added to obtain
the ‘‘dates of the treatment’’ pertinent to
the adjudicative guideline for
Psychological Conditions.
The following Federal agencies,
agency components and multi-agency
working groups made comments during
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the public comment period following
the December 2008 30-day Notice: DHS,
DNI, JRT, Office of the Under Secretary
of Defense (Intelligence) (USDI),
Department of the Interior, DOE, OPM,
National Security Agency, and an eApplication Content Working Group
(ECWG) comprised of representatives
from OPM, DOS, FBI, National
Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA),
DHS, Department of the Air Force,
National Reconnaissance Office (NRO),
National Security Agency (NSA),
Defense Security Service (DSS), and
Office of the Secretary of Defense
General Counsel (OSDGC). DHS, DOE,
USDI, OPM, DoD, and ECWG made
comments regarding the collection of
mental health treatment information
relative to treatment resulting from
service in a military combat
environment. The ECWG made
numerous comments recommending
improvements to the formatting of
questions for clarity, as well as
recommendations to more clearly
specify that the time periods being
asked about for certain questions pertain
to the respondent’s whole life. For
certain questions, such as those
regarding foreign countries visited and
contact with foreign nationals, the
ECWG recommended the required
response period be expanded to ‘‘ever’’
rather than 7 years. The ECWG
recommended the section on Use of
Information Technology expand to
collect information regarding
‘‘attempts’’ at misconduct in addition to
actual conduct. The vast majority of
comments from the JRT were formatting
recommendations for the purpose of
clarity and, where possible, to align
common language from other
investigative forms where the meaning
and intent are identical.
Following the public comment
period, the Acting Director, OPM,
requested that OMB permit OPM to
withdraw the proposed revisions to the
suite of forms, including the SF 86, then
pending before OMB for clearance, a
request that OMB granted February 23,
2009, in order to provide the current
Administration’s officials at OPM and
other concerned agencies the
opportunity to review the collection and
propose revisions as necessary based on
their review. OPM and OMB pursued a
multi-agency review together with the
Department of Justice, Department of
Defense, and Director of National
Intelligence. The proposed SF 86
resulting from that review is the basis
for this 30-day notice and request for
comments. The review resulted in the
following changes to the SF 86 proposed
in the December 31, 2008 30-day notice:
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 30, 2009 / Notices
Language was added to provide
additional clarity regarding the
penalties for incomplete and/or
inaccurate statements. Language was
added to clarify that the form may also
be used by agencies in determining
whether a subject performing work for
or on behalf of the Government under a
contract should be deemed eligible for
logical or physical access when the
nature of the work to be performed is
sensitive and could bring about an
adverse effect on the national security.
Language referencing immunity
protections was added to the questions
regarding illegal use of drugs or drug
activity, use of information technology
systems, and association record.
Questions were added to the section on
police record in order to identify
respondents who may be impacted by
the restrictions cited in the Lautenberg
Amendment. The advisement regarding
mental health counseling was expanded
to explain that mental health counseling
in and of itself is not a reason to revoke
or deny eligibility for access to
classified information or for a sensitive
position, suitability or fitness to obtain
or retain Federal employment, fitness to
obtain or retain contract employment, or
eligibility for physical or logical access
to Federally controlled facilities or
information systems. Questions that
elicited the reason for and nature of
mental health treatment were removed,
as were questions regarding
participation in self-help groups for
alcohol abuse. In the financial record
section, the question regarding
involvement with a credit counseling
service was amended to better capture
mitigating information from
respondents who seek assistance to
resolve financial difficulties. A question
on holding foreign political office and
voting in foreign elections was moved
from the form’s association record
section to the form’s foreign activities
section.
To provide additional clarity, a copy
of a matrix, ‘‘Changes between Current
Form and proposed Sep 09 30-day
Notice,’’ that shows the changes
between the currently approved SF 86
and the SF 86 proposed in this 30-day
notice, is available upon request.
John Berry,
Director, U.S. Office of Personnel
Management.
[FR Doc. E9–23711 Filed 9–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–53–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:56 Sep 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
Business Loan Program Maximum
Allowable Fixed Rate
AGENCY: U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA).
ACTION: Notice announcing maximum
allowable fixed rate.
SUMMARY: This Notice announces the
maximum allowable fixed rate for 7(a)
guaranteed loans.
DATES: This Notice is effective October
1, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
Lender Relations Specialist in the SBA
district office nearest you. The list of
offices can be found at https://
www.sba.gov/localresources/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agency
regulations at 13 CFR 120.213(a), Fixed
Rates for Guaranteed Loans, state the
following: ‘‘A loan may have a
reasonable fixed interest rate. SBA
periodically publishes the maximum
allowable rate in the Federal Register.’’
For a number of years, the SBA
maximum allowable fixed rate has been
based on the Prime rate. Because the
Prime rate is a short term rate, very few
lenders have been willing to make long
term SBA Section 7(a) loans with a fixed
rate. In order to provide small
businesses with an opportunity to lock
in the fixed interest rates available in
the market today, SBA is revising how
the maximum allowable fixed rate is
calculated. Effective October 1, 2009,
the SBA maximum allowable fixed rate
for 7(a) loans (other than SBA Express
and Export Express loans) will utilize a
new base rate for fixed rate loans (Fixed
Base Rate) plus the maximum allowable
spreads that are already being used on
variable rate loans.
The Fixed Base Rate for a 7(a) loan
will be calculated as follows: The SBA
LIBOR Base Rate (defined in 13 CFR
120.214 as the 1-month LIBOR in effect
on the first business day of the month
as printed in a national financial
newspaper each business day PLUS 300
basis points), plus the average of the 5year and 10-year LIBOR swap rates in
effect on the first business day of the
month as printed in a national financial
newspaper published each business
day. In other words, the Fixed Base Rate
is based on the rate a borrower would
pay if it purchased a floating-to-fixed
rate swap contract on a 7(a) loan. A
swap rate factors in what the money
markets identify as the likely difference
between a variable rate and a fixed rate
over a set period of time. SBA chose to
use the average of the 5-year and 10-year
LIBOR swap rates in the calculation of
the maximum allowable fixed rate
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
50263
because these rates are published in a
financial newspaper on a daily basis
and the average of these two rates will
provide a basis for a maximum
allowable fixed rate appropriate both for
shorter term and longer term loans.
The maximum allowable fixed rate for
7(a) loans (excluding SBA Express and
Export Express) will be the Fixed Base
Rate plus the allowable interest rate
spreads identified in 13 CFR 120.214 (d)
and (e) and 13 CFR 120.215. (For SBA
Express and Export Express loans, the
maximum allowable interest rate is the
prime rate plus 6.5 or 4.5 depending on
the loan amount. See SOP 50 10 5(B),
Subpart B, Chapter 3. SOP 50 10 5(B)
may be found at https://www.sba.gov/
aboutsba/sbaprograms/elending/reg/
index.html.)
The following is an example for 7(a)
loan applications (other than SBA
Express and Export Express), submitted
to SBA in the month of September 2009
if the new policy had been in effect:
The SBA LIBOR Base Rate for
September is 3.26.
The 5-year LIBOR swap rate on the
first business day of September as
published in a national financial
newspaper was 2.72 (rounded to the
second decimal). The 10-year LIBOR
swap rate on the first business day of
September as published in a national
financial newspaper was 3.60 (rounded
to the second decimal). The average of
these two rates is 3.16.
The SBA Fixed Base Rate for loans
submitted to SBA during September
2009 would have been 6.42 [3.26 (SBA
LIBOR Base Rate) + 3.16 (average of 5year and 10-year swap rates)].
Thus, the maximum allowable fixed
rates for 7(a) loans (other than SBA
Express and Export Express) submitted
to SBA in September 2009 would have
been as follows:
For 7(a) loans with a maturity less
than 7 years: 6.42 (SBA Fixed Base Rate
for September) + 2.25 (maximum spread
for loans with a maturity less than 7
years) equals 8.67 (maximum allowable
fixed rate). If the loan amount is over
$25,000 but not exceeding $50,000, the
maximum allowable fixed rate may be
increased by one percentage point. If the
loan amount is $25,000 or less, the
maximum allowable fixed rate may be
increased by two percentage points.
For 7(a) loans with a maturity of 7
years or more: 6.42 (SBA Fixed Base
Rate for September) + 2.75 (maximum
spread for loans with a maturity of 7
years or more) equals 9.17 (maximum
allowable fixed rate). If the loan amount
is over $25,000 but not exceeding
$50,000, the maximum allowable fixed
rate may be increased by one percentage
point. If the loan amount is $25,000 or
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 188 (Wednesday, September 30, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50260-50263]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-23711]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
Submission for Review: Questionnaire for National Security
Positions, SF 86
AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
ACTION: 30-Day Notice and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Investigative Services Division (FISD), U.S.
Office of Personnel Management (OPM) offers the general public and
other Federal agencies the opportunity to comment on an information
collection request (ICR), Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Control
No. 3206-0005, for the General Request for the Questionnaire for
National Security Positions, (SF 86). As required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35) as
amended by the Clinger-Cohen Act (Pub. L. 104-106), OPM is soliciting
comments for this collection. The Office of Management and Budget is
particularly interested in comments that:
1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
2. Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of
the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submissions of responses.
DATES: Comments are encouraged and will be accepted until October 30,
2009. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR part 1320.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on
the proposed information collection to the FISD, OPM, 1900 E. Street,
NW., Room 2H31, Washington, DC 20415, Attention: MaryKay Brewer or sent
via electronic mail to SFRevisionComments@opm.gov; and Jasmeet K.
Seehra, OMB Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, 725
17th Street, NW., Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A copy of this ICR, with applicable
supporting documentation, and/or a copy of the Change Matrix described
in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, below, may be obtained by contacting
the FISD, OPM, 1900 E. Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention:
MaryKay Brewer or sent via electronic mail to MaryKay.Brewer@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces that OPM submitted to
OMB a request for review and clearance of the revised collection of
information, Questionnaire for National Security Positions SF 86 (OMB
Control No. 3206-0005), which includes e-QIP (Electronic Questionnaires
for Investigations Processing).
[[Page 50261]]
Previously, OPM requested OMB review and clear a suite of
investigative forms that were packaged under OMB Control No. 3206-0005
and included the Questionnaire for National Security Positions, SF 86.
Due to the continuing Executive and congressional interest in improving
and streamlining the processes by which security clearances are
granted, OMB has granted a request by OPM to review and clear the
various expiring investigative forms separately so as to move forward
at this time with the Questionnaire for National Security Positions, SF
86.
The SF 86 will be used by the U.S. Government in conducting
background investigations, reinvestigations, and continuous
evaluations, as appropriate, of persons under consideration for or
retention in national security positions as defined in 5 CFR part 732
and for positions requiring eligibility for access to classified
information under Executive Order 12968. This form may also be used by
agencies in determining whether a subject performing work for or on
behalf of the Government under a contract should be deemed eligible for
logical or physical access when the nature of the work to be performed
is sensitive and could bring about an adverse effect on the national
security. It is estimated that 21,800 non-Federal individuals will
complete the SF 86 annually. Each form takes approximately 150 minutes
to complete. The estimated annual burden is 54,500 hours. e-QIP is a
Web-based system application that currently houses an electronic
version of the SF 86. This Internet data collection tool provides
faster processing time and immediate data validation to ensure accuracy
of the respondent's personal information. The e-Government initiative
mandates that agencies utilize e-QIP for all investigations and
reinvestigations. A variable in assessing burden hours is the nature of
the electronic application. The electronic application includes
branching questions and instructions which provide for a tailored
collection from the respondent based on varying factors in the
respondent's personal history. The burden on the respondent is reduced
when the respondent's personal history is not relevant to a particular
question, since the question branches, or expands for additional
details, only for those persons who have pertinent information to
provide regarding that line of questioning. As such, the burden on the
respondent will vary depending on whether the information collection
relates to the respondent's personal history. Additionally, once
entered, a respondent's complete and certified investigative data
remain secured in the e-QIP system until the next time the respondent
is sponsored by an agency to complete a new investigative form. Upon
initiation, the respondent's previously entered data (except `yes/no'
questions) will populate a new investigative request and the respondent
will be allowed to update their information and certify the data. In
this instance, time to complete the form is reduced significantly.
The 60-day Federal Register Notice was published June 23, 2008
(Volume 73, Number 121, pages 35421-35422). The notice proposed to
change the SF 86 to specify continuous evaluation as a purpose of the
form and a part of the investigative process. The ``Authorization for
Release of Information'' was amended to acknowledge that the
information provided may be used to conduct officially sanctioned and
approved personnel security-related research and studies. The
authorization language was amended to change the period the
authorization remains in effect from (up to) five years to an
unspecified period so long as the respondent remains employed in a
sensitive position requiring access to classified information. The Fair
Credit Reporting Disclosure and Authorization Form was made part of the
proposed SF 86 as required under OMB Terms of Clearance. It is
important to note that at the time the Federal Register notice was
posted in June 2008, agencies were still utilizing the 1995 version of
the form as the version in use today had not yet been implemented.
The following Federal agencies, agency components and multi-agency
working groups made comments during the public comment period following
the 60-day Notice: Social Security Administration, Joint Security and
Suitability Reform Team (JRT), Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Agency for
International Development, Department of Homeland Security (DHS),
Central Intelligence Agency, Department of Transportation, Director of
National Intelligence (DNI), Department of State (DOS), Department of
State Mental Health Services, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Defense
Personnel Security Research Center, Department of Energy (DOE), and
internal commentators from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management
(OPM). OPM internal commentators mostly focused on administrative
issues related to the formatting of the instructions and layout of the
questions on the former paper collection. Most comments from agencies
other than the JRT focused on changes to the collection of mental
health treatment information relative to treatment resulting from
service in a military combat environment. The JRT comments focused on
collecting from the respondent more accurate and relevant information
of investigative and adjudicative significance earlier in the
investigative process, to wit at the time the respondent completes the
form, and the JRT recommended expanded branching questions in most
sections of the form to collect additional details.
A 30-day Federal Register Notice was published December 31, 2008
(Volume 73, Number 251, pages 80445-80447). This notice proposed an SF
86 that incorporated the significant and substantial changes to the
lines of questioning recommended in the comments by the JRT. Section 9,
Citizenship, was changed to collect additional information that will
assist in verifying citizenship of respondents born outside of the U.S.
Branching questions inserted after each response tailored the
elicitation of information to the respondent's personal history.
Section 10, Dual/Multiple Citizenship, was expanded to include broader
questions designed to elicit information pertinent to the adjudicative
guideline for Foreign Preference. At Section 11, Where You Have Lived,
branching questions replaced detailed instructions for all respondents
and instead tailored the collection to elicit information based on the
respondent's relevant personal history. Additional contact information
for the residence reference was added to assist investigation. At
Section 12, Where You Went To School, the instructions were changed to
require 7 years of information vice 10 regarding certain educational
activities and the verbiage was changed regarding listing degrees or
diplomas received more than 7 years ago to be consistent with changes
to the investigative standards. At Section 13a, Employment Activities,
branching questions were added to reduce detailed instructions for all
respondents and tailor instructions as applicable to the respondent.
``Code 9--Non-government employment (excluding self-employment)'' was
added to the employment types for clarity. Additionally, branching
questions for foreign addresses and contacts were added to assist
investigation. At Section 13c, Employment Record, branching questions
were added to prompt the applicant to enter the required information
following each positive response, thereby simplifying the
[[Page 50262]]
detailed instructions previously necessary. The requirement to specify
whether the respondent was laid off from a job was deleted as this
information was not pertinent to the adjudicative guidelines regarding
personal conduct and handling protected information that drive the
Employment Record section. At Section 15, Military Service, branching
questions were added to collect more specific details pertinent to the
Personal Conduct and Criminal Conduct adjudicative guidelines.
Branching question were added to elicit more information regarding
foreign military service to obtain information pertinent to the
adjudicative guidelines for Foreign Influence and Foreign Preference.
At Section 16, People Who Know You Well, branching questions were added
to clarify and collect additional information pertaining to the
references. At Section 17, instructions were branched to assist
investigations, and the definition of ``cohabitant'' was clarified.
Section 18 was reformatted for branching questions and ``Visa'' was
added to the listing of types of documentation to support
investigation. At Section 19, Foreign Activities, ``influence''
replaced ``common interests'' for clarity regarding relationships with
foreign nationals. Branching questions were added to obtain additional
information pertaining to foreign connections and the approximate
frequency of contact to support the Foreign Influence adjudicative
guideline. At Section 20, additional questions regarding foreign
financial activities, foreign real estate, and receipt of benefits from
a foreign country, including questions concerning the subject's
immediate family members, were added to elicit information pertinent to
the Foreign Influence guideline. Additional questions regarding foreign
employment, business ventures, travel, and foreign government contacts,
including questions concerning the subject's immediate family members,
were added to elicit information pertinent to the Foreign Influence,
Foreign Preference, and Outside Activities adjudicative guidelines. At
Question 21, additional branching questions were added to elicit
information regarding mental health conditions and treatment pertinent
to the adjudicative guideline for Psychological Conditions, including
questions about counseling or treatment providers, whether treatment
was on an in-patient basis, whether admission was voluntary, and
whether the subject was ever adjudicated as mentally incompetent. At
Section 22, Police Record, branching questions were added to inquire
about the disposition of criminal proceedings, and to inquire about
offenses related to firearms, explosives, alcohol and drugs for a 7
year period vice an unlimited period pertaining to the respondent's
entire life. At Section 23, Illegal Use of Drugs or Drug Activity,
questions were added regarding intent of future use and drug treatment
pertinent to the adjudicative guideline for Drug Involvement. The
requirement to report possession of drugs was replaced with a broader
collection requiring reporting of illegal purchase. At Section 24, Use
of Alcohol, questions were branched to further identify actions taken
by applicant to pursue and/or complete recommended counseling/treatment
and to elicit pertinent information regarding the adjudicative
guideline for Alcohol Consumption. At Section 25, Investigations and
Clearance Record, branching questions were added to elicit information
necessary for investigation to obtain relevant prior records and to
elicit information potentially connected to the adjudicative guideline
for Handling Protected Information. Additionally, questions regarding
investigations by foreign governments were added to elicit information
pertinent to the adjudicative guideline for Foreign Preference. At
Section 26, Financial Record, branching questions were added to elicit
specific detailed information pertaining to each financial area instead
of an open text field for respondents to provide explanation. The time
frame for reporting delinquencies on any debt was changed to 120 days,
instead of 180 days for prior debts and 90 days for current debts. A
question was added regarding involvement with a credit counseling
service to support the adjudicative guideline for Financial
Considerations. At Section 28, Involvement in Non-Criminal Court
Actions, the time period respondents are required to report was changed
to the last 7 years vice 10. At Section 29, Association Record,
branching questions were added to collect detailed information versus
providing a blank area for explanation. The Certification Statement was
amended to remove verbiage regarding security clearance to clarify
penalties for incomplete or inaccurate statements. On the medical
release, a question was added to obtain the ``dates of the treatment''
pertinent to the adjudicative guideline for Psychological Conditions.
The following Federal agencies, agency components and multi-agency
working groups made comments during the public comment period following
the December 2008 30-day Notice: DHS, DNI, JRT, Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense (Intelligence) (USDI), Department of the Interior,
DOE, OPM, National Security Agency, and an e-Application Content
Working Group (ECWG) comprised of representatives from OPM, DOS, FBI,
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), DHS, Department of the
Air Force, National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), National Security
Agency (NSA), Defense Security Service (DSS), and Office of the
Secretary of Defense General Counsel (OSDGC). DHS, DOE, USDI, OPM, DoD,
and ECWG made comments regarding the collection of mental health
treatment information relative to treatment resulting from service in a
military combat environment. The ECWG made numerous comments
recommending improvements to the formatting of questions for clarity,
as well as recommendations to more clearly specify that the time
periods being asked about for certain questions pertain to the
respondent's whole life. For certain questions, such as those regarding
foreign countries visited and contact with foreign nationals, the ECWG
recommended the required response period be expanded to ``ever'' rather
than 7 years. The ECWG recommended the section on Use of Information
Technology expand to collect information regarding ``attempts'' at
misconduct in addition to actual conduct. The vast majority of comments
from the JRT were formatting recommendations for the purpose of clarity
and, where possible, to align common language from other investigative
forms where the meaning and intent are identical.
Following the public comment period, the Acting Director, OPM,
requested that OMB permit OPM to withdraw the proposed revisions to the
suite of forms, including the SF 86, then pending before OMB for
clearance, a request that OMB granted February 23, 2009, in order to
provide the current Administration's officials at OPM and other
concerned agencies the opportunity to review the collection and propose
revisions as necessary based on their review. OPM and OMB pursued a
multi-agency review together with the Department of Justice, Department
of Defense, and Director of National Intelligence. The proposed SF 86
resulting from that review is the basis for this 30-day notice and
request for comments. The review resulted in the following changes to
the SF 86 proposed in the December 31, 2008 30-day notice:
[[Page 50263]]
Language was added to provide additional clarity regarding the
penalties for incomplete and/or inaccurate statements. Language was
added to clarify that the form may also be used by agencies in
determining whether a subject performing work for or on behalf of the
Government under a contract should be deemed eligible for logical or
physical access when the nature of the work to be performed is
sensitive and could bring about an adverse effect on the national
security. Language referencing immunity protections was added to the
questions regarding illegal use of drugs or drug activity, use of
information technology systems, and association record. Questions were
added to the section on police record in order to identify respondents
who may be impacted by the restrictions cited in the Lautenberg
Amendment. The advisement regarding mental health counseling was
expanded to explain that mental health counseling in and of itself is
not a reason to revoke or deny eligibility for access to classified
information or for a sensitive position, suitability or fitness to
obtain or retain Federal employment, fitness to obtain or retain
contract employment, or eligibility for physical or logical access to
Federally controlled facilities or information systems. Questions that
elicited the reason for and nature of mental health treatment were
removed, as were questions regarding participation in self-help groups
for alcohol abuse. In the financial record section, the question
regarding involvement with a credit counseling service was amended to
better capture mitigating information from respondents who seek
assistance to resolve financial difficulties. A question on holding
foreign political office and voting in foreign elections was moved from
the form's association record section to the form's foreign activities
section.
To provide additional clarity, a copy of a matrix, ``Changes
between Current Form and proposed Sep 09 30-day Notice,'' that shows
the changes between the currently approved SF 86 and the SF 86 proposed
in this 30-day notice, is available upon request.
John Berry,
Director, U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
[FR Doc. E9-23711 Filed 9-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-53-P
