Reporting of Security Issues, 22625-22630 [2011-9629]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report to each House of
the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of this final rule in the
Federal Register. This final rule is not
a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2011–9849 Filed 4–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Transportation Security Administration
49 CFR Part 1503
[Docket No. TSA–2009–0014; Amendment
No. 1503–4]
RIN 1652–AA66
Reporting of Security Issues
Transportation Security
Administration, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) is adding
procedures by which any person will
receive a receipt for reporting a
problem, deficiency, or vulnerability
related to transportation security,
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
including the security of aviation,
amended as follows:
maritime, railroad, motor carrier
PART 180—[AMENDED]
vehicle, or pipeline transportation, or
any mode of public transportation, such
■ 1. The authority citation for part 180
as mass transit, in accordance with the
continues to read as follows:
‘‘Implementing Recommendations of the
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
9/11 Commission Act of 2007’’ (9/11
Act).
■ 2. Section 180.492 is amended by
DATES: Effective May 23, 2011.
revising the section heading and
paragraph (a) introductory text and
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
alphabetically adding the following
Traci Klemm, Office of Chief Counsel,
commodities to the table in paragraph
TSA–2, Transportation Security
(a) to read as follows:
Administration, 601 South 12th Street,
Arlington, VA 20598–6002; telephone
§ 180.492 Triflusulfuron-methyl; tolerances
(571) 227–3596; facsimile (571) 227–
for residues.
1380; e-mail traci.klemm@dhs.gov.
(a) General. Tolerances are
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
established for residues of
triflusulfuron-methyl, including its
Availability of Rulemaking Document
metabolites and degradates, in or on the
You can get an electronic copy using
commodities listed in the table below.
the Internet by—
Compliance with the tolerance levels
(1) Searching the electronic Federal
specified below is to be determined by
Docket Management System (FDMS)
measuring only triflusulfuron-methyl
Web page at https://www.regulations.gov;
(methyl 2-[[[[[4-(dimethylamino)-6(2) Accessing the Government
(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy)-1,3,5-triazin-2Printing Office’s Web page at https://
yl]amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-3www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/; or
methylbenzoate) in or on the following
(3) Visiting TSA’s Security
commodities:
Regulations Web page at https://
www.tsa.gov and accessing the link for
Parts per
‘‘Research Center’’ at the top of the page.
Commodity
million
In addition, copies are available by
writing or calling the person in the FOR
Beet, garden, roots ...................
0.01
Beet, garden, tops ....................
0.02 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Make sure to identify the docket number
of this rulemaking.
Dated: April 15, 2011.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Parts per
million
Commodity
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22625
Small Entity Inquiries
The Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires TSA to comply with small
entity requests for information and
advice about compliance with statutes
and regulations within TSA’s
jurisdiction. Any small entity that has a
question regarding this document may
contact the person listed in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. Persons can
obtain further information regarding
SBREFA on the Small Business
Administration’s Web page at https://
www.sba.gov/advo/laws/law_lib.html.
Background
In the immediate aftermath of the
events on September 11, 2001, the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
established a task force to respond to the
large volume of incoming phone calls,
e-mails, and letters from the public. On
June 1, 2002, the Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) assumed
responsibility for this response to the
public, creating what is now known as
the TSA Contact Center (TCC). The TCC
is a widely-publicized open line for the
public to contact TSA. As such, it has
also provided a mechanism through
which TSA may receive information
about potential threats to transportation
security from both well-meaning
persons and those with harmful intent.
In December 2004, TCC availability
was expanded to 24 hours a day, 7 days
a week, 365 days per year, primarily to
ensure continuous review for threatrelated contacts. The current process for
public reporting of potential security
violations, threat information or
criminal activities, vulnerabilities and
intelligence was put in place after the
DHS Office of Inspector General
assessed the Agency’s actions to
improve the handling of threat and nonthreat communications following an
incident where a college student was
testing security.1
TSA also has ongoing initiatives
within the various transportation
modes, such as the General Aviation
Secure Program, that includes hotline
numbers to alert TSA of security
concerns.2 Information from these
reporting options, along with reports of
other security incidents and concerns
required by various TSA regulations, is
received and processed by the same
analytical components of TSA. Through
1 See unclassified summary at: https://
www.dhs.gov/xoig/assets/mgmtrpts/OIG_0551_Sep05.pdf.
2 See https://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/tsnm/
general_aviation/
programs_sp.shtm#general_aviation for more
information on the General Aviation Secure
Program.
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
22626
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
the Transportation Security Operations
Center (TSOC) and other TSA
components, information is also
routinely passed to TSA’s partners for
appropriate response.
The ‘‘Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11
Commission Act’’ (9/11 Act) requires the
Secretary of Homeland Security to
establish, by regulation, a process for
any person to report transportationrelated security problems, deficiencies,
or vulnerabilities and promptly receive
an acknowledging receipt for their
report.3 This requirement is included in
provisions to protect transportationsector employees from discrimination or
other retaliation for reporting or
preventing violations of Federal laws
related to transportation safety or
security.4
Summary of the Rule
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
This rule, which implements the 9/11
requirements, establishes the process for
any person 5 to receive a receipt for
making a report to TSA regarding any
transportation-related security problem,
deficiency, or vulnerability. This
mechanism to receive a receipt for
reports applies to all modes of
transportation, including aviation,
commercial motor vehicle, maritime,
pipeline, public transportation, and
railroad transportation.
In § 1503.3(a) of the rule, TSA
designates the addresses and a
telephone number that a person must
use in order to obtain a receipt for their
report. In order to obtain a receipt, the
person must use one of these reporting
mechanisms and provide valid contact
information.
Paragraph (b) indicates how TSA will
provide a receipt acknowledging the
report. Reports submitted by mail or
through the Internet will receive written
confirmation. Internet receipts will
include the content of the report.
Reports submitted by phone will receive
a call identifier number. The call
identifier number is linked to a copy of
the information as recorded by TSA,
which will be maintained according to
TSA’s record retention schedules
(currently, these records are scheduled
to be retained by TSOC for two years).
To receive a written copy of the report,
the person will need to contact TSA at
3 Public Law 110–53, 121 Stat. 266 (August 3,
2007), sections 1413(i) (public transportation),
1521(i) (railroad carriers), and 1536(i) (commercial
motor vehicles); these sections are codified in the
United States Code at 6 U.S.C. 1142, 49 U.S.C.
20109, and 49 U.S.C. 31105, respectively. Future
references will be to the codified sections.
4 Id.
5 For purpose of TSA regulations, ‘‘person’’ is
defined in 49 CFR 1500.3.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
the address identified in the rule within
two years of their call and request a
paper copy.
Paragraph (c) reiterates TSA’s
commitment to review and consider all
information received and to take
appropriate steps.
Paragraph (d) clarifies that a report
made voluntarily under this subpart
will not satisfy any separate legal
obligation of any person to report
information to TSA or any other
Government agency under any other
law. Operators must comply with those
provisions regardless of whether a
report has been submitted through the
new part 1503 procedures.
Finally, paragraph (e) is a reminder
that these reporting mechanisms are not
to be used for reporting immediate or
emergency security or safety concerns.
These concerns should be immediately
reported to the appropriate emergency
services operator, such as by calling
911. Alleged waste, fraud, and abuse in
TSA programs should be reported to the
Department of Homeland Security
Inspector General: (800) 323–8603, or
DHSOIGHOTLINE@dhs.gov.
Authorities
As previously discussed, the 9/11 Act
requires DHS to issue this regulation for
transportation security-related reports
affecting public transportation, rail, and
motor carriers. TSA has determined that
the security benefits of receiving these
reports applies to modes of
transportation not enumerated in the
statute: Aviation, maritime, and
pipeline.
Aspects of this rule not required by
the 9/11 Act are supported by TSA’s
statutory authority to enhance security
for all modes of transportation.6 TSA
has broad regulatory authority and may
issue, rescind, and revise such
regulations as are necessary to carry out
its transportation security functions.7
Changes From the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM)
This final rule adopts the regulations
proposed in the NPRM 8 with minor
6 See 49 U.S.C. 114(d). The TSA Administrator’s
current authorities under ATSA have been
delegated to him by the Secretary of Homeland
Security. Section 403(2) of the Homeland Security
Act (HSA) of 2002, Public Law 107–296, 116 Stat.
2315 (Nov. 25, 2002), transferred all functions of
TSA, including those of the Secretary of
Transportation and the Under Secretary of
Transportation of Security related to TSA, to the
Secretary of Homeland Security. Pursuant to DHS
Delegation Number 7060.2, the Secretary of
Homeland Security delegated to the Administrator,
subject to the Secretary’s guidance and control, the
authority vested in the Secretary with respect to
TSA, including that in sec. 403(2) of the HSA.
7 49 U.S.C. 114(l)(1).
8 Published in the Federal Register on August 26,
2009 (74 FR 43088).
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
revisions. A scope provision has been
added. Addresses for providing reports
by mail, through the Internet, or by
phone have been added to 49 CFR part
1503. Information on how to obtain a
receipt has also been provided. This
preamble does not address technical
corrections or corrected typographical
errors.
While the text of the rule has not been
significantly altered since the NPRM,
the costs estimated for this regulation
have been significantly lowered. At the
time that the NPRM was published, TSA
intended to extensively publicize the
reporting mechanism for use by the
general public to report any
transportation-related security concern.
The costs in the NPRM reflected that
assumption. Since that time, however,
DHS has launched the ‘‘See Something,
Say Something’’ campaign.
The ‘‘See Something, Say Something’’
campaign is part of DHS’s commitment
to promoting a vigilant citizenry that
actively participates in protecting
national security. In her September 2010
speech to first responders at the NYC
Emergency Operations Center, Secretary
Napolitano noted in her prepared
remarks: ‘‘Recall that it was a New York
street vendor who tipped off a
policeman about the bombing attempt in
Times Square. It was a group of
passengers on Flight 253 who
intervened to stop the bombing attempt
on Christmas Day.’’ She then continued,
‘‘Making individuals and citizens better
informed and empowered is crucial, and
DHS has therefore launched, and is
expanding, a national campaign around
a slogan you probably know well: ‘If
You See Something, Say Something.’ ’’
The purpose of the campaign, as stated
by the Secretary, is to raise ‘‘awareness
of potential terrorist tactics, and
emphasizing the importance of
reporting suspicious activity to law
enforcement.’’
The implementation of that campaign
has changed TSA’s assumptions
regarding how the mechanisms required
by the 9/11 Act are likely to be used.
Where the NPRM estimated costs based
on the most currently available number
of all security-related calls to the
Contact Center and then increased that
amount based on additional publicity,
TSA now assumes that most reports
under this rule will be made by a subset
of the individuals who contact TSA
with security concerns, primarily made
up of employees within the
transportation sector seeking a reporting
mechanism that will provide them with
documentation of their report in the
event they may need it in the future.
This results in far fewer estimated
reports resulting from the mechanisms
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
under this final rule than estimated in
the NPRM.
As a result, the estimated costs have
been significantly reduced from those
provided in the NPRM. This specifically
relates to estimates for the number of
reports received and the TSA costs for
processing those reports. In addition,
TSA has developed new automated
mechanisms for providing receipts to
persons who report security concerns
through e-mail; all security-related
reports, regardless of whether they are
being made as a result of this rule or for
other reasons, will automatically receive
an e-mail receipt. This substantially
reduces the potential costs for TSA.
Public Comments on the NPRM
The public comment period for the
NPRM closed on October 26, 2009. TSA
received two public comments, from a
commercial airline and a trade
association representing members of the
aviation industry. TSA addresses these
comments below.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Including the Aviation Industry
Comments: One commenter objected
to including the aviation industry in the
scope of this rule because this sector is
already highly regulated and required to
report suspicious activities and events.
As part of these requirements, they
assert that knowledgeable employees
report deficiencies, incidents, and
vulnerabilities. They question whether
untrained persons will be able to
‘‘identify true vulnerabilities within
commercial aviation without the
understanding or comprehension of our
security programs?’’
TSA Response: This rule does not
create a reporting requirement; it
provides a voluntary reporting and
receipt mechanism. Therefore, it is
neither imposing an additional
regulatory burden upon the industry nor
duplicating the requirements for air
carriers or other owner/operators to
report security incidents and events. It
is intended to provide a mechanism for
anyone reporting transportation-related
security problems, deficiencies, and
vulnerabilities to obtain a receipt of
their report. TSA is not limiting the
scope for who can benefit from this
mechanism, recognizing that
transportation employees and members
of the general public are capable of
identifying things that are out of the
ordinary. TSA will evaluate the
information and determine whether
further investigation or validation is
necessary and by whom.
While the language regarding the
reporting and receipt mechanism is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
inclusive, referencing ‘‘any person,’’ 9 we
note that the requirement for TSA to
develop this mechanism is contained in
statutory provisions that are focused on
providing protections for surface
transportation employees who report
concerns to authorities and are
subsequently subject to retaliation,
discharge, or discrimination.10 The 9/11
Act can be seen as an extension of these
protections previously enacted for
aviation employees.11 The processes set
forth in this rule provide all
transportation-related employees with
the ability to obtain a receipt for reports.
TSA Rewards Program
Comments: As noted in the preamble
of the NPRM,12 TSA is in the process of
developing a program to confer
monetary or other recognition on
persons who provide valuable
information to TSA about criminal acts
or other violations relating to
transportation security. One commenter
raised questions regarding how TSA is
planning to administer a rewards
program for persons who provide
valuable information related to
transportation security.
TSA Response: The rewards program
is still under development. Any
information regarding implementation
of a rewards program by TSA will be
contained in other documents when
appropriate.
Costs of the Rule
Comments: One commenter asserted
that implementation of this rule will
cost the taxpayers $1,000,000 annually
and provide no benefit. They asserted
the ‘‘traveling consumer should not bear
the monetary burden of this program.’’
TSA response: Costs for implementing
this statutorily-required rule have been
revised and are discussed in Economic
Impact Analyses section of this
preamble. TSA disagrees that there is no
benefit from providing this mechanism.
It is important for the public, travelers,
and employees to remain vigilant and
play an active role in keeping the
country’s transportation network, and
the people who rely on it, safe and
secure. Similar to the ‘‘If You See
Something, Say Something’’ campaign
originally implemented by New York
City’s Metropolitan Transit Authority, it
is important to raise awareness and
ensure reporting of vulnerabilities and
weaknesses in security measures that
could make the transportation sector a
9 6 U.S.C. 1142(i), 49 U.S.C. 20109(i), and 49
U.S.C. 31105(i).
10 6 U.S.C. 1142, 49 U.S.C. 20109, and 49 U.S.C.
31105.
11 See 49 U.S.C. 42121.
12 See 74 FR 43090 (August 26, 2009).
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22627
weak target for terrorists and others with
malicious intent.
Coordination With the ‘‘General
Aviation Hotline’’ Program
Comments: One commenter urged
TSA to ensure that the processes
identified in this rule complement the
existing ‘‘General Aviation Hotline’’
program. They state that this program is
well known within the general aviation
industry and is part of an ongoing effort
to develop a more comprehensive
reporting for aviation security.
TSA response: The mechanism
created by this rule complements the
General Aviation Hotline program. The
General Aviation Hotline program, also
known as the General Aviation Secure
Program, was developed by TSA’s
Office of Transportation Sector Network
Management (TSNM) General Aviation
Division by working with the industry
and community to build upon the
Airport Watch program, encouraging
everyone to be vigilant about General
Aviation security and report any
unusual activities to TSA. Now seen in
the context of the Department of
Homeland Security’s broader ‘‘See
Something, Say Something Campaign,’’
the program includes a number where
suspicions regarding operations can be
reported, such as pilots appearing to be
under the control of others, unfamiliar
persons loitering around the field,
suspicious aircraft lease or rental
requests, anyone making threats, and
unusual, suspicious activities or
circumstances. Information from reports
made by persons under this rule will be
processed and analyzed through the
same TSA component as information
received through the General Aviation
program, providing TSA with a more
comprehensive picture of threats and
vulnerabilities to transportation
security.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) requires
that TSA consider the impact of
paperwork and other information
collection burdens imposed on the
public and, under the provisions of
PRA, 44 U.S.C. section 3507(d), obtain
approval from the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for each collection of
information it conducts, sponsors, or
requires through regulations. As
protection provided by the Paperwork
Reduction Act, as amended, an agency
may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. TSA has determined there are
no current or new information
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
22628
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
collection requirements associated with
this rule.
Economic Impact Analyses
Regulatory Evaluation
Changes to Federal regulations must
undergo several economic analyses.
First, Executive Order (EO) 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review,13
directs each Federal agency to propose
or adopt a regulation only upon a
reasoned determination that the benefits
of the intended regulation justify its
costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility
Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as
amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996) requires agencies to
consider the economic impact of
regulatory changes on small entities.
Third, the Trade Agreements Act (19
U.S.C. 2531–2533) prohibits agencies
from setting standards that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States. Fourth,
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
agencies to prepare a written assessment
of the costs, benefits, and other effects
of proposed or final rules that include
a Federal mandate likely to result in the
expenditure by State, local, or Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
annually (adjusted for inflation).
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Executive Order 12866 Assessment
In conducting these analyses, TSA
determined:
1. This rulemaking is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as
defined in the Executive Order.
2. This rulemaking will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
3. This rulemaking will not constitute
a barrier to international trade.
4. This rulemaking does not impose
an unfunded mandate on State, local, or
Tribal governments, or on the private
sector.
The basis for these conclusions is set
forth below.
Costs
This rule enhances the ability for any
person to report to TSA—via regular
mail, through the Internet, or
telephone—security problems,
deficiencies, or vulnerabilities related to
aviation, maritime, railroad, motor
vehicle, pipeline, or public
transportation. As previously discussed,
when TSA prepared its initial draft of
this rule, it intended to extensively
publicize the reporting mechanism for
use by the general public to report any
13 58
FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
transportation-related security concern.
The costs in the NPRM reflected that
assumption. Since that time, however,
DHS has developed the ‘‘See Something,
Say Something’’ campaign. The
implementation of that campaign has
changed TSA’s assumptions for how the
reporting and receipt mechanisms
required by the 9/11 Act are likely to be
used.
TSA now assumes that most reports
under this rule will be made by a subset
of the general population, primarily
made up of employees within the
transportation sector seeking a reporting
mechanism that will provide them with
documentation of their report in the
event they may need it in the future.
This results in far fewer estimated
reports under this final rule than
estimated in the NPRM. As a result, the
estimated costs have been significantly
reduced from those provided in the
NPRM. This specifically relates to
estimates for the number of reports
received and the TSA costs for
processing those reports. In addition,
TSA has developed new automated
mechanisms for providing receipts to
persons who report security concerns
through e-mail; all security-related
reports, regardless of whether they are
being made as a result of this rule or for
other reasons, will automatically receive
an e-mail receipt. Consistent with the
estimates of the NPRM, TSA assumes
that the costs associated with the
operation of this reporting system will
be incurred by TSA and the person
making the report.
TSA currently provides the public
with the ability to communicate security
concerns by contacting TSA’s Contact
Center (1–866–289–9673) or through the
TSA Web site (https://www.tsa.gov), by
clicking on the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link at the
top of the home page, clicking on the
‘‘Security Issues’’ link, and submitting
an online form describing the securityrelated issue (received by TSA as an email). If someone misses that link and
scrolls on down the page, there is
another heading (‘‘Security Violations
and Concerns’’) that provides an
additional opportunity to submit a
report.
As a result of this rulemaking, the
‘‘Security Violation and Concerns’’
section of the site will include a
hyperlink back to the ‘‘Security Issues’’
form and the additional contact
addresses identified in this rule.
Therefore, this analysis of costs and
benefits assumes that all Web-based
reports under this rule will be through
the ‘‘Security Issues’’ form on TSA’s
Web site. As noted, the public will also
be able to make reports by contacting
TSA directly through a designated
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
phone number or submitting a report
through the mail to a designated
address.
There is no accurate method for
gauging how many additional e-mail
messages, telephone calls, and letters
reporting transportation security
concerns these changes to the Web site
could generate. While estimating an
accurate cost to the public of voluntarily
reporting security concerns to TSA is
difficult, one can use fiscal year (FY)
2010 TSA Contact Center (TCC) data as
a starting point to estimate the cost of
potential scenarios. For this analysis, we
assumed that the rule will incrementally
expand the number of security-related
telephone calls and e-mail messages
TSA received in FY 2010 by 25 percent.
In FY 2010, the TCC fielded 393
security-related telephone calls that
could be categorized as reporting a
transportation-related security problem,
deficiency, or vulnerability. (While the
TCC may receive many more calls that
a person has self-selected to be
‘‘security-related,’’ not all of those are
within the scope of what is anticipated
to be relevant to this rule.) These calls
are addressed by security specialists
who help determine whether the issue
involves an issue related to
transportation security or other
complaints or concerns that the caller
may have. They also determine whether
the information provided will fit within
the scope of the rule. Issues requiring
action by TSA are routed to the
appropriate TSA components. The
security specialists also route
information relevant to sister agencies to
their designated points of contact.
According to the TCC, the average
telephone conversation involving a
security specialist during FY 2010
lasted 3.25 minutes. For purposes of the
NPRM, TSA estimated the calls would
last approximately 4 minutes.14
However, the Transportation Security
Operations Center (TSOC), which will
start fielding these calls in FY 2011,
assumes that calls from the public as a
result of this rule will mostly come from
a subset of callers who want a receipt
acknowledging their call; processing
these calls may require more detailed
information than the average call. This
primarily includes the information
needed to provide the person with a
receipt, which is not required for all
calls received by TSOC. TSOC considers
ten minutes to be a reasonable estimate
for the length of such a call. If one
projects that the public will place 98
additional calls (.25 × 393) as a result of
the rule (for the purposes of this
analysis, TSA assumes that all of these
14 See
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
75 FR 43090.
22APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
calls will be from individuals wanting a
receipt and providing the necessary
contact information), then the public
would spend 980 minutes (98 calls at
about 10 minutes per call) on the
telephone with TSA. At $19.32 per
hour,15 the total annual cost to the
public for the additional telephone calls
will be $316 ($19.32 per hour × 980
minutes/60 minutes per hour).
To estimate the cost of contacting
TSA electronically, this analysis used
other data collected by the TCC as a
starting point. In FY 2010 the TCC
received 1,527 security-related e-mail
messages from customers who logged
onto the TSA Web site and used the
links described above. TSA receives
information submitted through the Web
site in the form of an e-mail. As noted
under the analysis for phone calls, the
TCC may receive many more e-mails
that a person has self-selected than are
within the scope of what is anticipated
to be relevant to this rule. The estimates
reflect those e-mails that are relevant to
the rule.
If one assumes that TSA will receive
an additional 382 e-mail messages
(1,527 × .25) as a result of this rule and
that the average e-mail message will
require thirty minutes to prepare, one
can modify the value-of-time formula
used to calculate the FY 2010 cost of
security-related telephonic reports to
TSA to estimate the cost to the public
of e-mailing its concerns: 382 e-mail
messages × 30/60 hours per e-mail
message × $19.32 per hour = $3,690.
TSA has doubled the time estimate
assumed in the NPRM due to the more
detailed information one would expect
to be provided; a person who is
reporting a security vulnerability or
deficiency is likely to have more
information regarding security
requirements that are not being
followed.16 Because the receipt
mechanism for persons making reports
through TSA’s Web site is automated,
any person who reports through this
mechanism will receive a receipt if they
provide contact information.
The rule will also allow the public to
report transportation-related security
15 For purposes of this rulemaking, TSA uses the
May 2009 Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) mean
hourly wage rate for all Transportation and Material
Moving Occupations (SOC Code 53–0000), adjusted
for inflation. To access this information, go to the
following BLS Web sites: https://data.bls.gov/cgibin/print.pl/oes/2009/may/naics2_48-49.htm and
https://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpid1012.pdf. The $19.00
mean hourly wage rate found at the first Web site
is converted to 2010 dollars by multiplying it times
1.0168, the amount by which the Consumer Price
Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers
(CPI–W) rose between 2009 and 2010 (215.262/
211.703 = 1.0168).
16 See 75 FR 43091.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
problems, deficiencies, and
vulnerabilities by regular mail (the
mailing address will be posted on the
TSA Web site). As previously noted,
TSA assumes the majority of persons
contacting TSA by mail and requesting
a receipt will be subset of the general
population, primarily made up of
employees within the transportation
sector seeking a reporting mechanism
that will provide them with
documentation of their report in the
event they may need it in the future. In
addition, TSA also assumes that most
persons will report by e-mail as they
will be provided with a more
comprehensive verification of their
report as the automated e-mail will
include the exact text that they
submitted. As a result, the estimated
costs have been significantly reduced
from those provided in the NPRM. If
one projects that this rule will generate
50 letters per year and that it takes the
average letter writer 30 minutes to write
a report and 15 minutes to mail it, the
value of the public’s time for this
exercise equates to $725 (50 letters ×
45/60 hour per letter × $19.32 per hour).
This increase in time from the NPRM is
consistent with that for the other
reporting mechanisms. When the cost of
postage is included (50 letters × $.44 per
stamp = $22), using regular mail to
report transportation security-related
problems, deficiencies, and
vulnerabilities to TSA will cost the
public $747.
The projected cost of the three modes
of communication—$316 for telephone
calls, $3,690 for Web-based
communications, and $747 for regular
mail—is $4,753. As reporting under this
rule is voluntary, the public would
assume this direct cost voluntarily; the
cost is not imposed by this rule.
In addition to this direct cost to the
public, TSA will incur expenses in
handling the increased volume of
reports. Although it is not feasible to
accurately establish the number of
additional telephonic, e-mail, and
regular mail reports this rule will
generate, TSOC is prepared to dedicate
one full time equivalent (FTE) employee
(at an overall cost of $80,208 17 per year)
to handle the increased volume of
communications. In addition to the
labor costs associated with responding
to the increase in security-related
contacts, TSA will incur two non-labor
expenses. This reduction from the
estimates in the NPRM 18 is consistent
with the reductions in estimates for the
public.
The hardware and software needed to
implement the ‘‘auto-response’’ function
for Web-based reports will cost $2,060
($1,100 for a dedicated desktop
computer and $960 for software). This
feature provides an electronic receipt
including the content of their report to
anyone who uses the ‘‘Security Issues’’
Web form on the TSA Web site to
submit security concerns (people who
contact TSA by phone will be provided
a unique identifier number for the call).
Persons who submit reports by mail
will receive a receipt in the mail. If one
projects that this rule will generate 50
letters per year and that all the letters
will have return addresses, the cost of
mailing a response will be $22 (50
letters × $.44 per stamp = $22).
Taken together, the estimated labor
expense ($80,208) and receipt processes
($2,060 for auto-response and $22 for
mail) yield a total annual cost to TSA of
$82,290.19
Benefits
This rulemaking provides the
following benefits:
1. It reminds the public that TSA
wants to receive these reports, possibly
alerting TSA to transportation security
concerns that may otherwise have been
overlooked. It is quite possible that
reports from the public could prevent a
national security problem that otherwise
would have gone unaddressed.
2. It encourages employees and other
persons who may hesitate to make a
report for fear of retaliation or other
adverse action to obtain the necessary
documentation to support any future
claims under 6 U.S.C. 1142, 49 U.S.C.
20109, 49 U.S.C. 31105, and 49 U.S.C.
42121.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Assessment
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
of 1980 requires that agencies perform a
review to determine whether a proposed
or final rule will have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. If the
determination is that it will, the agency
must prepare a regulatory flexibility
analysis as described in the RFA. For
purposes of the RFA, small entities
include small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations, and small governmental
18 See
75 FR 43091.
will incur no incremental costs for
training because in-house training has already been
funded. There also will be no additional expenses
for space, computers, and telephones; existing
equipment at TSOC will be used to handle the
expected increase in telephonic and electronic
reporting.
19 TSOC
17 Data from TSA’s Office of Financial
Management show that this was the average amount
of personal compensation and benefits paid out in
FY 2010 to a G–Band employee. The total
comprises $51,933 in base pay and $28,275 in
benefits.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22629
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
22630
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
jurisdictions. Individuals and States are
not included in the definition of a small
entity.
This rule enhances the public’s ability
to report security concerns voluntarily
to TSA. TSA and the public will incur
some costs in the operation of this
enhanced reporting system. As stated
previously, the public will voluntarily
assume the direct cost of reporting
problems and deficiencies to TSA; the
cost is not imposed by this rule. TSA
certifies that this rulemaking will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreement Act of 1979
prohibits Federal agencies from
establishing any standards or engaging
in related activities that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States.
Legitimate domestic objectives, such as
safety, are not considered unnecessary
obstacles. The statute also requires
consideration of international standards
and, where appropriate, that they be the
basis for U.S. standards. TSA has
assessed the potential effect of this
rulemaking and has determined that it
will impose the same costs on domestic
and international entities and thus have
a neutral trade impact.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Unfunded Mandates Assessment
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (UMRA), Public Law 104–4, is
intended, among other things, to curb
the practice of imposing unfunded
Federal mandates on State, local, and
Tribal governments. Title II of the Act
requires each Federal agency to prepare
a written statement assessing the effects
of any Federal mandate in a proposed or
final rule that may result in a $100
million or more expenditure (adjusted
annually for inflation) in any one year
by State, local, and Tribal governments,
in the aggregate, or by the private sector;
such a mandate is deemed to be a
‘‘significant regulatory action.’’
This rulemaking does not contain
such a mandate. The requirements of
Title II of the Act, therefore, do not
apply and TSA has not prepared a
statement under the Act.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
TSA has analyzed this final rule
under the principles and criteria of
Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We
determined that this action will not
have a substantial direct effect on the
States, or the relationship between the
National Government and the States, or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, and, therefore,
does not have federalism implications.
Environmental Analysis
TSA has reviewed this action for
purposes of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C.
4321–4347) and has determined that
this action will not have a significant
effect on the human environment.
Energy Impact Analysis
The energy impact of the action has
been assessed in accordance with the
Energy Policy and Conservation Act
(EPCA), Public Law 94–163, as amended
(42 U.S.C. 6362). We have determined
that this rulemaking is not a major
regulatory action under the provisions
of the EPCA.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 1503
Administrative practice and
procedure, Investigations, Law
enforcement, Penalties, Transportation.
The Amendments
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Transportation Security
Administration amends part 1503 in
chapter XII of title 49, Code of Federal
Regulations to read as follows:
PART 1503—INVESTIGATIVE AND
ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
1. The authority citation for part 1503
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 6 U.S.C. 1142; 18 U.S.C. 6002;
28 U.S.C. 2461 (note); 49 U.S.C. 114, 20109,
31105, 40113–40114, 40119, 44901–44907,
46101–46107, 46109–46110, 46301, 46305,
46311, 46313–46314.
2. Add subpart A to part 1503 to read
as follows:
■
Subpart A—General
Sec.
§ 1503.1 Scope.
§ 1503.3 Reports by the public of security
problems, deficiencies, and
vulnerabilities.
Subpart A—General
§ 1503.1
Scope.
This part provides information on
TSA’s investigative and enforcement
procedures.
§ 1503.3 Reports by the public of security
problems, deficiencies, and vulnerabilities.
This section prescribes the reporting
mechanisms that persons may use in
order to obtain a receipt for reports to
TSA regarding transportation-related
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
security problems, deficiencies, and
vulnerabilities.
(a) Any person who reports to TSA a
transportation security-related problem,
deficiency, or vulnerability—including
the security of aviation, commercial
motor vehicle, maritime, pipeline, any
mode of public transportation, or
railroad transportation—will receive a
receipt for their report if they provide
valid contact information and report
through one of the following:
(1) U.S. mail to Transportation
Security Administration HQ, TSA–2;
Attn: 49 CFR 1503.3 Reports; 601 South
12th Street; Arlington, VA 20598–6002;
(2) Internet at https://www.tsa.gov/
contact, selecting ‘‘Security Issues’’; or
(3) Telephone (toll-free) at 1–866–
289–9673.
(b) Reports submitted by mail will
receive a receipt through the mail,
reports submitted by the Internet will
receive an e-mail receipt, and reports
submitted by phone will receive a call
identifier number linked to TSA
documents held according to published
record schedules. To obtain a paper
copy of reports provided by phone, the
person who made the report, or their
authorized representative, must contact
TSA at the address identified in (a)(1) of
this section within that period and
provide the identifier number.
(c) TSA will review and consider the
information provided in any report
submitted under this section and take
appropriate steps to address any
problems, deficiencies, or
vulnerabilities identified.
(d) Nothing in this section relieves a
person of a separate obligation to report
information to TSA under another
provision of this title, a security
program, or a security directive, or to
another Government agency under other
law.
(e) Immediate or emergency security
or safety concerns should be reported to
the appropriate local emergency
services operator, such as by
telephoning 911. Alleged waste, fraud,
and abuse in TSA programs should be
reported to the Department of Homeland
Security Inspector General: telephone
(toll-free) 1–800–323–8603, or e-mail
DHSOIGHOTLINE@dhs.gov.
Issued in Arlington, Virginia, on April 1,
2011.
John S. Pistole,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011–9629 Filed 4–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–05–P
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 78 (Friday, April 22, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22625-22630]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9629]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Transportation Security Administration
49 CFR Part 1503
[Docket No. TSA-2009-0014; Amendment No. 1503-4]
RIN 1652-AA66
Reporting of Security Issues
AGENCY: Transportation Security Administration, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is adding
procedures by which any person will receive a receipt for reporting a
problem, deficiency, or vulnerability related to transportation
security, including the security of aviation, maritime, railroad, motor
carrier vehicle, or pipeline transportation, or any mode of public
transportation, such as mass transit, in accordance with the
``Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007'' (9/
11 Act).
DATES: Effective May 23, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Traci Klemm, Office of Chief Counsel,
TSA-2, Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12th Street,
Arlington, VA 20598-6002; telephone (571) 227-3596; facsimile (571)
227-1380; e-mail traci.klemm@dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of Rulemaking Document
You can get an electronic copy using the Internet by--
(1) Searching the electronic Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) Web page at https://www.regulations.gov;
(2) Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/; or
(3) Visiting TSA's Security Regulations Web page at https://www.tsa.gov and accessing the link for ``Research Center'' at the top
of the page.
In addition, copies are available by writing or calling the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Make sure to identify
the docket number of this rulemaking.
Small Entity Inquiries
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires TSA to comply with small entity requests for information
and advice about compliance with statutes and regulations within TSA's
jurisdiction. Any small entity that has a question regarding this
document may contact the person listed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. Persons can obtain further information regarding SBREFA on the
Small Business Administration's Web page at https://www.sba.gov/advo/laws/law_lib.html.
Background
In the immediate aftermath of the events on September 11, 2001, the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) established a task force to
respond to the large volume of incoming phone calls, e-mails, and
letters from the public. On June 1, 2002, the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) assumed responsibility for this response to the
public, creating what is now known as the TSA Contact Center (TCC). The
TCC is a widely-publicized open line for the public to contact TSA. As
such, it has also provided a mechanism through which TSA may receive
information about potential threats to transportation security from
both well-meaning persons and those with harmful intent.
In December 2004, TCC availability was expanded to 24 hours a day,
7 days a week, 365 days per year, primarily to ensure continuous review
for threat-related contacts. The current process for public reporting
of potential security violations, threat information or criminal
activities, vulnerabilities and intelligence was put in place after the
DHS Office of Inspector General assessed the Agency's actions to
improve the handling of threat and non-threat communications following
an incident where a college student was testing security.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See unclassified summary at: https://www.dhs.gov/xoig/assets/mgmtrpts/OIG_05-51_Sep05.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA also has ongoing initiatives within the various transportation
modes, such as the General Aviation Secure Program, that includes
hotline numbers to alert TSA of security concerns.\2\ Information from
these reporting options, along with reports of other security incidents
and concerns required by various TSA regulations, is received and
processed by the same analytical components of TSA. Through
[[Page 22626]]
the Transportation Security Operations Center (TSOC) and other TSA
components, information is also routinely passed to TSA's partners for
appropriate response.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See https://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/tsnm/general_aviation/programs_sp.shtm#general_aviation for more information on the
General Aviation Secure Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ``Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act'' (9/
11 Act) requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish, by
regulation, a process for any person to report transportation-related
security problems, deficiencies, or vulnerabilities and promptly
receive an acknowledging receipt for their report.\3\ This requirement
is included in provisions to protect transportation-sector employees
from discrimination or other retaliation for reporting or preventing
violations of Federal laws related to transportation safety or
security.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Public Law 110-53, 121 Stat. 266 (August 3, 2007), sections
1413(i) (public transportation), 1521(i) (railroad carriers), and
1536(i) (commercial motor vehicles); these sections are codified in
the United States Code at 6 U.S.C. 1142, 49 U.S.C. 20109, and 49
U.S.C. 31105, respectively. Future references will be to the
codified sections.
\4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of the Rule
This rule, which implements the 9/11 requirements, establishes the
process for any person \5\ to receive a receipt for making a report to
TSA regarding any transportation-related security problem, deficiency,
or vulnerability. This mechanism to receive a receipt for reports
applies to all modes of transportation, including aviation, commercial
motor vehicle, maritime, pipeline, public transportation, and railroad
transportation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ For purpose of TSA regulations, ``person'' is defined in 49
CFR 1500.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Sec. 1503.3(a) of the rule, TSA designates the addresses and a
telephone number that a person must use in order to obtain a receipt
for their report. In order to obtain a receipt, the person must use one
of these reporting mechanisms and provide valid contact information.
Paragraph (b) indicates how TSA will provide a receipt
acknowledging the report. Reports submitted by mail or through the
Internet will receive written confirmation. Internet receipts will
include the content of the report. Reports submitted by phone will
receive a call identifier number. The call identifier number is linked
to a copy of the information as recorded by TSA, which will be
maintained according to TSA's record retention schedules (currently,
these records are scheduled to be retained by TSOC for two years). To
receive a written copy of the report, the person will need to contact
TSA at the address identified in the rule within two years of their
call and request a paper copy.
Paragraph (c) reiterates TSA's commitment to review and consider
all information received and to take appropriate steps.
Paragraph (d) clarifies that a report made voluntarily under this
subpart will not satisfy any separate legal obligation of any person to
report information to TSA or any other Government agency under any
other law. Operators must comply with those provisions regardless of
whether a report has been submitted through the new part 1503
procedures.
Finally, paragraph (e) is a reminder that these reporting
mechanisms are not to be used for reporting immediate or emergency
security or safety concerns. These concerns should be immediately
reported to the appropriate emergency services operator, such as by
calling 911. Alleged waste, fraud, and abuse in TSA programs should be
reported to the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General:
(800) 323-8603, or DHSOIGHOTLINE@dhs.gov.
Authorities
As previously discussed, the 9/11 Act requires DHS to issue this
regulation for transportation security-related reports affecting public
transportation, rail, and motor carriers. TSA has determined that the
security benefits of receiving these reports applies to modes of
transportation not enumerated in the statute: Aviation, maritime, and
pipeline.
Aspects of this rule not required by the 9/11 Act are supported by
TSA's statutory authority to enhance security for all modes of
transportation.\6\ TSA has broad regulatory authority and may issue,
rescind, and revise such regulations as are necessary to carry out its
transportation security functions.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See 49 U.S.C. 114(d). The TSA Administrator's current
authorities under ATSA have been delegated to him by the Secretary
of Homeland Security. Section 403(2) of the Homeland Security Act
(HSA) of 2002, Public Law 107-296, 116 Stat. 2315 (Nov. 25, 2002),
transferred all functions of TSA, including those of the Secretary
of Transportation and the Under Secretary of Transportation of
Security related to TSA, to the Secretary of Homeland Security.
Pursuant to DHS Delegation Number 7060.2, the Secretary of Homeland
Security delegated to the Administrator, subject to the Secretary's
guidance and control, the authority vested in the Secretary with
respect to TSA, including that in sec. 403(2) of the HSA.
\7\ 49 U.S.C. 114(l)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes From the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
This final rule adopts the regulations proposed in the NPRM \8\
with minor revisions. A scope provision has been added. Addresses for
providing reports by mail, through the Internet, or by phone have been
added to 49 CFR part 1503. Information on how to obtain a receipt has
also been provided. This preamble does not address technical
corrections or corrected typographical errors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Published in the Federal Register on August 26, 2009 (74 FR
43088).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the text of the rule has not been significantly altered since
the NPRM, the costs estimated for this regulation have been
significantly lowered. At the time that the NPRM was published, TSA
intended to extensively publicize the reporting mechanism for use by
the general public to report any transportation-related security
concern. The costs in the NPRM reflected that assumption. Since that
time, however, DHS has launched the ``See Something, Say Something''
campaign.
The ``See Something, Say Something'' campaign is part of DHS's
commitment to promoting a vigilant citizenry that actively participates
in protecting national security. In her September 2010 speech to first
responders at the NYC Emergency Operations Center, Secretary Napolitano
noted in her prepared remarks: ``Recall that it was a New York street
vendor who tipped off a policeman about the bombing attempt in Times
Square. It was a group of passengers on Flight 253 who intervened to
stop the bombing attempt on Christmas Day.'' She then continued,
``Making individuals and citizens better informed and empowered is
crucial, and DHS has therefore launched, and is expanding, a national
campaign around a slogan you probably know well: `If You See Something,
Say Something.' '' The purpose of the campaign, as stated by the
Secretary, is to raise ``awareness of potential terrorist tactics, and
emphasizing the importance of reporting suspicious activity to law
enforcement.''
The implementation of that campaign has changed TSA's assumptions
regarding how the mechanisms required by the 9/11 Act are likely to be
used. Where the NPRM estimated costs based on the most currently
available number of all security-related calls to the Contact Center
and then increased that amount based on additional publicity, TSA now
assumes that most reports under this rule will be made by a subset of
the individuals who contact TSA with security concerns, primarily made
up of employees within the transportation sector seeking a reporting
mechanism that will provide them with documentation of their report in
the event they may need it in the future. This results in far fewer
estimated reports resulting from the mechanisms
[[Page 22627]]
under this final rule than estimated in the NPRM.
As a result, the estimated costs have been significantly reduced
from those provided in the NPRM. This specifically relates to estimates
for the number of reports received and the TSA costs for processing
those reports. In addition, TSA has developed new automated mechanisms
for providing receipts to persons who report security concerns through
e-mail; all security-related reports, regardless of whether they are
being made as a result of this rule or for other reasons, will
automatically receive an e-mail receipt. This substantially reduces the
potential costs for TSA.
Public Comments on the NPRM
The public comment period for the NPRM closed on October 26, 2009.
TSA received two public comments, from a commercial airline and a trade
association representing members of the aviation industry. TSA
addresses these comments below.
Including the Aviation Industry
Comments: One commenter objected to including the aviation industry
in the scope of this rule because this sector is already highly
regulated and required to report suspicious activities and events. As
part of these requirements, they assert that knowledgeable employees
report deficiencies, incidents, and vulnerabilities. They question
whether untrained persons will be able to ``identify true
vulnerabilities within commercial aviation without the understanding or
comprehension of our security programs?''
TSA Response: This rule does not create a reporting requirement; it
provides a voluntary reporting and receipt mechanism. Therefore, it is
neither imposing an additional regulatory burden upon the industry nor
duplicating the requirements for air carriers or other owner/operators
to report security incidents and events. It is intended to provide a
mechanism for anyone reporting transportation-related security
problems, deficiencies, and vulnerabilities to obtain a receipt of
their report. TSA is not limiting the scope for who can benefit from
this mechanism, recognizing that transportation employees and members
of the general public are capable of identifying things that are out of
the ordinary. TSA will evaluate the information and determine whether
further investigation or validation is necessary and by whom.
While the language regarding the reporting and receipt mechanism is
inclusive, referencing ``any person,'' \9\ we note that the requirement
for TSA to develop this mechanism is contained in statutory provisions
that are focused on providing protections for surface transportation
employees who report concerns to authorities and are subsequently
subject to retaliation, discharge, or discrimination.\10\ The 9/11 Act
can be seen as an extension of these protections previously enacted for
aviation employees.\11\ The processes set forth in this rule provide
all transportation-related employees with the ability to obtain a
receipt for reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 6 U.S.C. 1142(i), 49 U.S.C. 20109(i), and 49 U.S.C.
31105(i).
\10\ 6 U.S.C. 1142, 49 U.S.C. 20109, and 49 U.S.C. 31105.
\11\ See 49 U.S.C. 42121.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA Rewards Program
Comments: As noted in the preamble of the NPRM,\12\ TSA is in the
process of developing a program to confer monetary or other recognition
on persons who provide valuable information to TSA about criminal acts
or other violations relating to transportation security. One commenter
raised questions regarding how TSA is planning to administer a rewards
program for persons who provide valuable information related to
transportation security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See 74 FR 43090 (August 26, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA Response: The rewards program is still under development. Any
information regarding implementation of a rewards program by TSA will
be contained in other documents when appropriate.
Costs of the Rule
Comments: One commenter asserted that implementation of this rule
will cost the taxpayers $1,000,000 annually and provide no benefit.
They asserted the ``traveling consumer should not bear the monetary
burden of this program.''
TSA response: Costs for implementing this statutorily-required rule
have been revised and are discussed in Economic Impact Analyses section
of this preamble. TSA disagrees that there is no benefit from providing
this mechanism. It is important for the public, travelers, and
employees to remain vigilant and play an active role in keeping the
country's transportation network, and the people who rely on it, safe
and secure. Similar to the ``If You See Something, Say Something''
campaign originally implemented by New York City's Metropolitan Transit
Authority, it is important to raise awareness and ensure reporting of
vulnerabilities and weaknesses in security measures that could make the
transportation sector a weak target for terrorists and others with
malicious intent.
Coordination With the ``General Aviation Hotline'' Program
Comments: One commenter urged TSA to ensure that the processes
identified in this rule complement the existing ``General Aviation
Hotline'' program. They state that this program is well known within
the general aviation industry and is part of an ongoing effort to
develop a more comprehensive reporting for aviation security.
TSA response: The mechanism created by this rule complements the
General Aviation Hotline program. The General Aviation Hotline program,
also known as the General Aviation Secure Program, was developed by
TSA's Office of Transportation Sector Network Management (TSNM) General
Aviation Division by working with the industry and community to build
upon the Airport Watch program, encouraging everyone to be vigilant
about General Aviation security and report any unusual activities to
TSA. Now seen in the context of the Department of Homeland Security's
broader ``See Something, Say Something Campaign,'' the program includes
a number where suspicions regarding operations can be reported, such as
pilots appearing to be under the control of others, unfamiliar persons
loitering around the field, suspicious aircraft lease or rental
requests, anyone making threats, and unusual, suspicious activities or
circumstances. Information from reports made by persons under this rule
will be processed and analyzed through the same TSA component as
information received through the General Aviation program, providing
TSA with a more comprehensive picture of threats and vulnerabilities to
transportation security.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.)
requires that TSA consider the impact of paperwork and other
information collection burdens imposed on the public and, under the
provisions of PRA, 44 U.S.C. section 3507(d), obtain approval from the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of
information it conducts, sponsors, or requires through regulations. As
protection provided by the Paperwork Reduction Act, as amended, an
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. TSA has determined there are no current or
new information
[[Page 22628]]
collection requirements associated with this rule.
Economic Impact Analyses
Regulatory Evaluation
Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Order (EO) 12866, Regulatory Planning and
Review,\13\ directs each Federal agency to propose or adopt a
regulation only upon a reasoned determination that the benefits of the
intended regulation justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996) requires
agencies to consider the economic impact of regulatory changes on small
entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 2531-2533)
prohibits agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Fourth, the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires
agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and
other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more annually (adjusted for inflation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Executive Order 12866 Assessment
In conducting these analyses, TSA determined:
1. This rulemaking is not a ``significant regulatory action'' as
defined in the Executive Order.
2. This rulemaking will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
3. This rulemaking will not constitute a barrier to international
trade.
4. This rulemaking does not impose an unfunded mandate on State,
local, or Tribal governments, or on the private sector.
The basis for these conclusions is set forth below.
Costs
This rule enhances the ability for any person to report to TSA--via
regular mail, through the Internet, or telephone--security problems,
deficiencies, or vulnerabilities related to aviation, maritime,
railroad, motor vehicle, pipeline, or public transportation. As
previously discussed, when TSA prepared its initial draft of this rule,
it intended to extensively publicize the reporting mechanism for use by
the general public to report any transportation-related security
concern. The costs in the NPRM reflected that assumption. Since that
time, however, DHS has developed the ``See Something, Say Something''
campaign. The implementation of that campaign has changed TSA's
assumptions for how the reporting and receipt mechanisms required by
the 9/11 Act are likely to be used.
TSA now assumes that most reports under this rule will be made by a
subset of the general population, primarily made up of employees within
the transportation sector seeking a reporting mechanism that will
provide them with documentation of their report in the event they may
need it in the future. This results in far fewer estimated reports
under this final rule than estimated in the NPRM. As a result, the
estimated costs have been significantly reduced from those provided in
the NPRM. This specifically relates to estimates for the number of
reports received and the TSA costs for processing those reports. In
addition, TSA has developed new automated mechanisms for providing
receipts to persons who report security concerns through e-mail; all
security-related reports, regardless of whether they are being made as
a result of this rule or for other reasons, will automatically receive
an e-mail receipt. Consistent with the estimates of the NPRM, TSA
assumes that the costs associated with the operation of this reporting
system will be incurred by TSA and the person making the report.
TSA currently provides the public with the ability to communicate
security concerns by contacting TSA's Contact Center (1-866-289-9673)
or through the TSA Web site (https://www.tsa.gov), by clicking on the
``Contact Us'' link at the top of the home page, clicking on the
``Security Issues'' link, and submitting an online form describing the
security-related issue (received by TSA as an e-mail). If someone
misses that link and scrolls on down the page, there is another heading
(``Security Violations and Concerns'') that provides an additional
opportunity to submit a report.
As a result of this rulemaking, the ``Security Violation and
Concerns'' section of the site will include a hyperlink back to the
``Security Issues'' form and the additional contact addresses
identified in this rule. Therefore, this analysis of costs and benefits
assumes that all Web-based reports under this rule will be through the
``Security Issues'' form on TSA's Web site. As noted, the public will
also be able to make reports by contacting TSA directly through a
designated phone number or submitting a report through the mail to a
designated address.
There is no accurate method for gauging how many additional e-mail
messages, telephone calls, and letters reporting transportation
security concerns these changes to the Web site could generate. While
estimating an accurate cost to the public of voluntarily reporting
security concerns to TSA is difficult, one can use fiscal year (FY)
2010 TSA Contact Center (TCC) data as a starting point to estimate the
cost of potential scenarios. For this analysis, we assumed that the
rule will incrementally expand the number of security-related telephone
calls and e-mail messages TSA received in FY 2010 by 25 percent.
In FY 2010, the TCC fielded 393 security-related telephone calls
that could be categorized as reporting a transportation-related
security problem, deficiency, or vulnerability. (While the TCC may
receive many more calls that a person has self-selected to be
``security-related,'' not all of those are within the scope of what is
anticipated to be relevant to this rule.) These calls are addressed by
security specialists who help determine whether the issue involves an
issue related to transportation security or other complaints or
concerns that the caller may have. They also determine whether the
information provided will fit within the scope of the rule. Issues
requiring action by TSA are routed to the appropriate TSA components.
The security specialists also route information relevant to sister
agencies to their designated points of contact. According to the TCC,
the average telephone conversation involving a security specialist
during FY 2010 lasted 3.25 minutes. For purposes of the NPRM, TSA
estimated the calls would last approximately 4 minutes.\14\ However,
the Transportation Security Operations Center (TSOC), which will start
fielding these calls in FY 2011, assumes that calls from the public as
a result of this rule will mostly come from a subset of callers who
want a receipt acknowledging their call; processing these calls may
require more detailed information than the average call. This primarily
includes the information needed to provide the person with a receipt,
which is not required for all calls received by TSOC. TSOC considers
ten minutes to be a reasonable estimate for the length of such a call.
If one projects that the public will place 98 additional calls (.25 x
393) as a result of the rule (for the purposes of this analysis, TSA
assumes that all of these
[[Page 22629]]
calls will be from individuals wanting a receipt and providing the
necessary contact information), then the public would spend 980 minutes
(98 calls at about 10 minutes per call) on the telephone with TSA. At
$19.32 per hour,\15\ the total annual cost to the public for the
additional telephone calls will be $316 ($19.32 per hour x 980 minutes/
60 minutes per hour).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See 75 FR 43090.
\15\ For purposes of this rulemaking, TSA uses the May 2009
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) mean hourly wage rate for all
Transportation and Material Moving Occupations (SOC Code 53-0000),
adjusted for inflation. To access this information, go to the
following BLS Web sites: https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/print.pl/oes/2009/may/naics2_48-49.htm and https://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpid1012.pdf.
The $19.00 mean hourly wage rate found at the first Web site is
converted to 2010 dollars by multiplying it times 1.0168, the amount
by which the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and
Clerical Workers (CPI-W) rose between 2009 and 2010 (215.262/211.703
= 1.0168).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To estimate the cost of contacting TSA electronically, this
analysis used other data collected by the TCC as a starting point. In
FY 2010 the TCC received 1,527 security-related e-mail messages from
customers who logged onto the TSA Web site and used the links described
above. TSA receives information submitted through the Web site in the
form of an e-mail. As noted under the analysis for phone calls, the TCC
may receive many more e-mails that a person has self-selected than are
within the scope of what is anticipated to be relevant to this rule.
The estimates reflect those e-mails that are relevant to the rule.
If one assumes that TSA will receive an additional 382 e-mail
messages (1,527 x .25) as a result of this rule and that the average e-
mail message will require thirty minutes to prepare, one can modify the
value-of-time formula used to calculate the FY 2010 cost of security-
related telephonic reports to TSA to estimate the cost to the public of
e-mailing its concerns: 382 e-mail messages x 30/60 hours per e-mail
message x $19.32 per hour = $3,690. TSA has doubled the time estimate
assumed in the NPRM due to the more detailed information one would
expect to be provided; a person who is reporting a security
vulnerability or deficiency is likely to have more information
regarding security requirements that are not being followed.\16\
Because the receipt mechanism for persons making reports through TSA's
Web site is automated, any person who reports through this mechanism
will receive a receipt if they provide contact information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See 75 FR 43091.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The rule will also allow the public to report transportation-
related security problems, deficiencies, and vulnerabilities by regular
mail (the mailing address will be posted on the TSA Web site). As
previously noted, TSA assumes the majority of persons contacting TSA by
mail and requesting a receipt will be subset of the general population,
primarily made up of employees within the transportation sector seeking
a reporting mechanism that will provide them with documentation of
their report in the event they may need it in the future. In addition,
TSA also assumes that most persons will report by e-mail as they will
be provided with a more comprehensive verification of their report as
the automated e-mail will include the exact text that they submitted.
As a result, the estimated costs have been significantly reduced from
those provided in the NPRM. If one projects that this rule will
generate 50 letters per year and that it takes the average letter
writer 30 minutes to write a report and 15 minutes to mail it, the
value of the public's time for this exercise equates to $725 (50
letters x 45/60 hour per letter x $19.32 per hour). This increase in
time from the NPRM is consistent with that for the other reporting
mechanisms. When the cost of postage is included (50 letters x $.44 per
stamp = $22), using regular mail to report transportation security-
related problems, deficiencies, and vulnerabilities to TSA will cost
the public $747.
The projected cost of the three modes of communication--$316 for
telephone calls, $3,690 for Web-based communications, and $747 for
regular mail--is $4,753. As reporting under this rule is voluntary, the
public would assume this direct cost voluntarily; the cost is not
imposed by this rule.
In addition to this direct cost to the public, TSA will incur
expenses in handling the increased volume of reports. Although it is
not feasible to accurately establish the number of additional
telephonic, e-mail, and regular mail reports this rule will generate,
TSOC is prepared to dedicate one full time equivalent (FTE) employee
(at an overall cost of $80,208 \17\ per year) to handle the increased
volume of communications. In addition to the labor costs associated
with responding to the increase in security-related contacts, TSA will
incur two non-labor expenses. This reduction from the estimates in the
NPRM \18\ is consistent with the reductions in estimates for the
public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Data from TSA's Office of Financial Management show that
this was the average amount of personal compensation and benefits
paid out in FY 2010 to a G-Band employee. The total comprises
$51,933 in base pay and $28,275 in benefits.
\18\ See 75 FR 43091.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The hardware and software needed to implement the ``auto-response''
function for Web-based reports will cost $2,060 ($1,100 for a dedicated
desktop computer and $960 for software). This feature provides an
electronic receipt including the content of their report to anyone who
uses the ``Security Issues'' Web form on the TSA Web site to submit
security concerns (people who contact TSA by phone will be provided a
unique identifier number for the call).
Persons who submit reports by mail will receive a receipt in the
mail. If one projects that this rule will generate 50 letters per year
and that all the letters will have return addresses, the cost of
mailing a response will be $22 (50 letters x $.44 per stamp = $22).
Taken together, the estimated labor expense ($80,208) and receipt
processes ($2,060 for auto-response and $22 for mail) yield a total
annual cost to TSA of $82,290.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ TSOC will incur no incremental costs for training because
in-house training has already been funded. There also will be no
additional expenses for space, computers, and telephones; existing
equipment at TSOC will be used to handle the expected increase in
telephonic and electronic reporting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits
This rulemaking provides the following benefits:
1. It reminds the public that TSA wants to receive these reports,
possibly alerting TSA to transportation security concerns that may
otherwise have been overlooked. It is quite possible that reports from
the public could prevent a national security problem that otherwise
would have gone unaddressed.
2. It encourages employees and other persons who may hesitate to
make a report for fear of retaliation or other adverse action to obtain
the necessary documentation to support any future claims under 6 U.S.C.
1142, 49 U.S.C. 20109, 49 U.S.C. 31105, and 49 U.S.C. 42121.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Assessment
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980 requires that agencies
perform a review to determine whether a proposed or final rule will
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the determination is that it will, the agency must prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA. For purposes
of the RFA, small entities include small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations, and small governmental
[[Page 22630]]
jurisdictions. Individuals and States are not included in the
definition of a small entity.
This rule enhances the public's ability to report security concerns
voluntarily to TSA. TSA and the public will incur some costs in the
operation of this enhanced reporting system. As stated previously, the
public will voluntarily assume the direct cost of reporting problems
and deficiencies to TSA; the cost is not imposed by this rule. TSA
certifies that this rulemaking will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from
establishing any standards or engaging in related activities that
create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Legitimate domestic objectives, such as safety, are not
considered unnecessary obstacles. The statute also requires
consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that
they be the basis for U.S. standards. TSA has assessed the potential
effect of this rulemaking and has determined that it will impose the
same costs on domestic and international entities and thus have a
neutral trade impact.
Unfunded Mandates Assessment
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public Law 104-4,
is intended, among other things, to curb the practice of imposing
unfunded Federal mandates on State, local, and Tribal governments.
Title II of the Act requires each Federal agency to prepare a written
statement assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or
final rule that may result in a $100 million or more expenditure
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year by State, local, and
Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a
mandate is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.''
This rulemaking does not contain such a mandate. The requirements
of Title II of the Act, therefore, do not apply and TSA has not
prepared a statement under the Act.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
TSA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and criteria
of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We determined that this action
will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, or the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, and, therefore, does not have federalism implications.
Environmental Analysis
TSA has reviewed this action for purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) and has
determined that this action will not have a significant effect on the
human environment.
Energy Impact Analysis
The energy impact of the action has been assessed in accordance
with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), Public Law 94-163,
as amended (42 U.S.C. 6362). We have determined that this rulemaking is
not a major regulatory action under the provisions of the EPCA.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 1503
Administrative practice and procedure, Investigations, Law
enforcement, Penalties, Transportation.
The Amendments
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Transportation
Security Administration amends part 1503 in chapter XII of title 49,
Code of Federal Regulations to read as follows:
PART 1503--INVESTIGATIVE AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
0
1. The authority citation for part 1503 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 6 U.S.C. 1142; 18 U.S.C. 6002; 28 U.S.C. 2461 (note);
49 U.S.C. 114, 20109, 31105, 40113-40114, 40119, 44901-44907, 46101-
46107, 46109-46110, 46301, 46305, 46311, 46313-46314.
0
2. Add subpart A to part 1503 to read as follows:
Subpart A--General
Sec.
Sec. 1503.1 Scope.
Sec. 1503.3 Reports by the public of security problems,
deficiencies, and vulnerabilities.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 1503.1 Scope.
This part provides information on TSA's investigative and
enforcement procedures.
Sec. 1503.3 Reports by the public of security problems, deficiencies,
and vulnerabilities.
This section prescribes the reporting mechanisms that persons may
use in order to obtain a receipt for reports to TSA regarding
transportation-related security problems, deficiencies, and
vulnerabilities.
(a) Any person who reports to TSA a transportation security-related
problem, deficiency, or vulnerability--including the security of
aviation, commercial motor vehicle, maritime, pipeline, any mode of
public transportation, or railroad transportation--will receive a
receipt for their report if they provide valid contact information and
report through one of the following:
(1) U.S. mail to Transportation Security Administration HQ, TSA-2;
Attn: 49 CFR 1503.3 Reports; 601 South 12th Street; Arlington, VA
20598-6002;
(2) Internet at https://www.tsa.gov/contact, selecting ``Security
Issues''; or
(3) Telephone (toll-free) at 1-866-289-9673.
(b) Reports submitted by mail will receive a receipt through the
mail, reports submitted by the Internet will receive an e-mail receipt,
and reports submitted by phone will receive a call identifier number
linked to TSA documents held according to published record schedules.
To obtain a paper copy of reports provided by phone, the person who
made the report, or their authorized representative, must contact TSA
at the address identified in (a)(1) of this section within that period
and provide the identifier number.
(c) TSA will review and consider the information provided in any
report submitted under this section and take appropriate steps to
address any problems, deficiencies, or vulnerabilities identified.
(d) Nothing in this section relieves a person of a separate
obligation to report information to TSA under another provision of this
title, a security program, or a security directive, or to another
Government agency under other law.
(e) Immediate or emergency security or safety concerns should be
reported to the appropriate local emergency services operator, such as
by telephoning 911. Alleged waste, fraud, and abuse in TSA programs
should be reported to the Department of Homeland Security Inspector
General: telephone (toll-free) 1-800-323-8603, or e-mail
DHSOIGHOTLINE@dhs.gov.
Issued in Arlington, Virginia, on April 1, 2011.
John S. Pistole,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011-9629 Filed 4-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-05-P