Air Cargo Screening Fees, 30542-30546 [2012-12555]
Download as PDF
30542
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2012 / Notices
Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and
Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room
7208, Bethesda, MD 20892–7924, 301–435–
0303, hurstj@nhlbi.nih.gov.
(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for
Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and
Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung
Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases
and Resources Research, National Institutes
of Health, HHS)
Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and
Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room
7192, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435–0287,
Pintuccig@nhlbi.nih.gov.
(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for
Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and
Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung
Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases
and Resources Research, National Institutes
of Health, HHS)
Dated: May 17, 2012.
Jennifer S. Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory
Committee Policy.
Dated: May 17, 2012.
Jennifer S. Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory
Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012–12518 Filed 5–22–12; 8:45 am]
[FR Doc. 2012–12517 Filed 5–22–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140–01–P
BILLING CODE 4140–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
National Institutes of Health
Coast Guard
National Heart, Lung, and Blood
Institute; Notice of Closed Meetings
[Docket No. USCG–2012–0460]
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, as
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is
hereby given of the following meetings.
The meetings will be closed to the
public in accordance with the
provisions set forth in sections
552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C.,
as amended. The grant applications and
the discussions could disclose
confidential trade secrets or commercial
property such as patentable material,
and personal information concerning
individuals associated with the grant
applications, the disclosure of which
would constitute a clearly unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy.
Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung,
and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel,
NHLBI Career Enhancement Grants for Stem
Cell Research
Date: June 13, 2012.
Time: 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.
Agenda: To review and evaluate grant
applications.
Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701
Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892
(Telephone Conference Call).
Contact Person: Melissa E Nagelin, Ph.D.,
Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific
Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and
Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Rm.
7202, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435–0297,
nagelinmh2@nhlbi.nih.gov.
Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung,
and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel,
Mentored Career Transition Scientist Award.
Date: June 14–15, 2012.
Time: 8 a.m. to 1 p.m.
Agenda: To review and evaluate grant
applications.
Place: The William F. Bolger Center, 9600
Newbridge Drive, Potomac, MD 20854.
Contact Person: Giuseppe Pintucci, Ph.D.,
Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 May 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
Notice of a Public Meeting To Prepare
for the Twenty-Second Session of the
Assembly of the International Mobile
Satellite Organization (IMSO)
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of public meeting.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The U.S. Coast Guard will
hold a public meeting on subject matters
that will be addressed at the TwentySecond Session of the Assembly of the
International Mobile Satellite
Organization (IMSO).
DATES: A public meeting will be held on
Thursday, May 31st, 2012, from 11 a.m.
to 12 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second
Street SW., Washington, DC, Room
1200.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lieutenant Commander Matthew Frazee
at (202) 372–1376 or by email to
imo@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
purpose of this public meeting is to
prepare for the Twenty-Second Session
of the International Mobile Satellite
Organization (IMSO) Assembly to be
held June 25–28, 2012 in London,
United Kingdom. The primary topics
that will be considered at the public
meeting include:
• Oversight and performance of the
Global Maritime Distress and Safety
System (GMDSS);
• Oversight, performance, audits,
charging formulas and proposals for the
Long Range Identification and Tracking
(LRIT) System;
• Directorate matters, including
succession planning and the term of the
current Director General;
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• Financial matters, including
arrangements for the development,
endorsement and agreement of the
IMSO budget.
Members of the public may attend
this meeting up to the seating capacity
of the room. To facilitate the security
process related to building access, or to
request reasonable accommodation,
those who plan to attend should contact
the meeting coordinator, LCDR Matthew
Frazee, by email at imo@uscg.mil, by
phone at (202) 372–1376, or in writing
at Commandant (CG–52), U.S. Coast
Guard, 2100 2nd Street SW., Stop 7126,
Washington, DC 20593–7126, not later
than May 24th, 2012. Requests made
after May 24, 2012, may not be able to
be accommodated. Please note that due
to building security requirements, each
visitor must present two valid,
government-issued photo identifications
in order to gain entrance to the Coast
Guard Headquarters building. The Coast
Guard Headquarters building is
accessible by taxi and privately owned
conveyance (public transportation is not
generally available). However, public
parking in the vicinity of the building is
extremely limited.
Members of the public are encouraged
to participate and join in discussions,
subject to the discretion of the
moderator. Persons wishing to make
formal presentations should provide
advance notice to Lieutenant
Commander Matthew Frazee at (202)
372–1376 or by email at imo@uscg.mil
as soon as possible.
Dated: May 17, 2012.
F.J. Sturm,
Acting Director of Commercial Regulations
and Standards, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2012–12457 Filed 5–22–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Transportation Security Administration
[Docket Nos. TSA–2004–19515 and TSA–
2009–0018]
RIN 1652–AA64
Air Cargo Screening Fees
Transportation Security
Administration, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of fees.
AGENCY:
This notice establishes user
fees for certain security threat
assessments (STAs) performed by the
Transportation Security Administration
(TSA). In the Air Cargo Screening final
rule published on August 18, 2011, TSA
proposed a fee range for security threat
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2012 / Notices
assessments of between $31 and $51
and sought comment on the fee range
and on the methodology used to
calculate the fee. The final rule stated
that TSA would announce the final fee
amount in a notice in the Federal
Register. This notice establishes a fee of
$41 for certain security threat
assessments in the air cargo program
and responds to public comments made
regarding the fee range.
DATES: Effective June 22, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Gambone, Director of Revenue,
TSA–14, Transportation Security
Administration, 601 South 12th Street,
Arlington, VA 20598–6014; telephone
(571) 227–2323; facsimile (571) 227–
2904; email tsa-fees@dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of 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.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/
collection.action?collectionCode=FR to
view the daily published Federal
Register edition; or accessing the
‘‘Search the Federal Register by
Citation’’ in the ‘‘Related Resources’’
column on the left, if you need to do a
Simple or Advanced search for
information, such as a type of document
that crosses multiple agencies or dates;
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 individual in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. Make sure to identify the docket
number of this rulemaking.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Background
On May 26, 2006, TSA issued the Air
Cargo Security Requirements final rule
(2006 rulemaking),1 which, in part,
required certain cargo workers of
aircraft operators, foreign air carriers,
and indirect air carriers (IACs) to
undergo an STA conducted by TSA.
TSA checks a variety of government
databases to verify the individual’s
identity and determine that he or she
does not pose a security threat to
transportation or national security. TSA
is authorized to collect fees to offset the
cost of conducting STAs. 6 U.S.C. 469.
The 2006 rulemaking established a fee
1 71
FR 30478.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 May 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
for STAs of $28, and incorporated the
fee amount in the civil aviation security
regulation. 49 CFR 1540.209.
On September 16, 2009, TSA
published the Air Cargo Screening
interim final rule (IFR) (2009 IFR),2
which establishes requirements for
certain additional individuals to obtain
an STA. These individuals are certified
cargo screening facilities (CCSF)
employees and authorized
representatives that screen cargo, and
have unescorted access to screened
cargo or carry out certain other cargo
security duties.
The 2009 IFR amended § 1540.209 to
remove the specific fee amount from the
regulatory text. In the preamble to the
2009 IFR, we described how TSA would
calculate the fee for STAs and stated
that the fee would be between $13 and
$21, depending on the size of the
population and whether there are
changes to the costs involved in the
calculation. TSA explained that TSA
would publish specific fee amounts and
changes to fee amounts as a notice in
the Federal Register.3 We invited
comment on the new proposed fee, and
the methodology and population
estimates we used to arrive at the
proposed fee. Since the issuance of the
IFR, TSA has not charged a fee for STA
processing, because the specific fee
amount was removed from the
regulatory text and was not published
elsewhere.
TSA has further reviewed costs and
population data since the IFR was
issued. On August 18, 2011, TSA
published the Air Cargo Screening final
rule (2011 rule) 4 that responded to
comments received on the IFR. The
2011 rule also explained that due to
significant decreases in the population
estimate, the fee necessary to recover
TSA’s costs of conducting threat
assessments would increase. TSA
proposed a new fee range between $31
and $51. We invited comment on the
new proposed fee, and the methodology
we used to arrive at the new proposed
fee range. The 2011 rule stated that TSA
would publish specific fee amounts and
changes to fee amounts as a notice in
the Federal Register.5
The 2011 rule also stated that the ‘‘Air
Cargo Screening Security Threat
2 74
FR 47672.
3 74 FR 47684.
4 76 FR 51848. Section 1540.209 of the 2006
rulemaking stated that a fee of $28 is required for
TSA to conduct an STA. The 2009 IFR, however,
revised § 1540.209 so that the regulation no longer
contains a specific fee amount. Section 1540.209
now states that TSA will publish fee amounts and
any revisions to the fee amounts as a notice in the
Federal Register.
5 76 FR 51857.
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30543
Assessment Fee Development Report’’
(Fee Report) provided additional
detailed information regarding the fee.
However, TSA inadvertently omitted to
place the report in the public docket.
Accordingly, on August 25, 2011, TSA
published a correction notice in the
Federal Register (August 25 notice) 6
explaining the omission and indicating
that TSA placed the Fee Report in the
public docket and reopened the
comment period on the fee for an
additional 30 days. TSA responds to
comments submitted on the fee below.
Fee Amount
By this notice, TSA announces the
final fee of $41 for STAs for employees
of aircraft operators, foreign air carriers,
IACs, and CCSFs who have or are
applying for unescorted access to cargo
to be transported on passenger aircraft,
screen cargo, supervise the screening of
cargo, or perform certain other security
functions as provided for in
§ 1540.201(a).
As TSA explained in the 2011 rule,7
changes in the population estimates
necessitated that TSA propose an
increase in the fee range to $31 to $51.8
In summarizing the changes from the
2009 IFR to the 2011 rule, the five-year
cost estimate for threat assessment
services increased by approximately
$4.2 million, and the five-year
population estimate decreased
significantly by approximately 551,000.
Because of the substantial decrease in
population, there will be fewer
applicants from which fixed costs of
threat assessment services can be
recovered, thereby increasing the per
applicant fee. To recover the full cost of
the STA services from the estimated
population described in § 1540.201,
TSA is announcing a fee of $41.
Pursuant to the Chief Financial
Officers Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101–576,
104 Stat. 2838, Nov. 15, 1990), TSA is
required to review fees no less than
every two years. 31 U.S.C. 3512. Upon
review, if TSA finds that the fees are
either too high (that is, total fees exceed
the total cost to provide the services) or
too low (that is, total fees do not cover
the total costs to provide the services),
TSA will adjust the fee accordingly.
Comments on the STA Fee Calculation
and Other Issues Relating to STAs
TSA received comments from 13
commenters on the 2011 rule and the
August 25 notice relating to the STA fee.
These comments are addressed below.
6 76
FR 53080.
FR 51857.
8 In the 2009 IFR, the fee range was $13 to $21.
7 76
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
30544
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2012 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
STA Fees
Comment: Several commenters
expressed the concern that the proposed
fee range is excessive and too expensive
for industry to bear, especially at this
time of economic downturn. One
commenter stated that the fee amount
for the name checks component of the
fee was disproportionate to the level of
administrative costs the agency incurs
by checking names against terrorists
data bases. Additional commenters
believed that an average annual
personnel cost of $134,000 is overstated.
Another commenter maintained that
the information technology platform/
systems component of the fee was
unnecessary, as this system has been in
place since 2006, and the commenter
believes that TSA should not charge for
the development of a system already in
place.
One commenter asserted that a search
of the applicant’s name through various
databases is primarily conducted by
electronic means, not requiring a large
amount of personnel, and that other
necessary functions for the STA are
carried out by IACs/CCSFs’ Security
Coordinators, further reducing TSA’s
need for personnel in the STA process.
A commenter suggested that if TSA
would allow submission of names in
batch format, versus one at a time, less
staff would be needed for the name
check.
TSA Response: While TSA recognizes
the STA fee will impose a new financial
burden on the industry during a period
of economic stress, TSA is required by
statute to collect fees to recover all costs
of conducting vetting and credentialing
services. 6 U.S.C. 469. As part of this
Congressional mandate, TSA works
within Federal guidelines to ensure the
most efficient use of resources to
minimize the cost of vetting services.
The STA fee is set to recover only the
cost of vetting services being provided
to STA applicants, and better aligns cost
recovery from those that directly benefit
from this unique security service.
Further, TSA conducts regular reviews
to ensure that fees are set to recover the
full cost of vetting services.
TSA used actual cost data from 2009
to determine that the average annual
fully burdened 9 cost of personnel
necessary for this vetting service was
$134,000. TSA used this actual figure to
estimate future personnel costs
accurately over the five-year period of
the cost model.
9 The fully burdened employee cost is comprised
of salary and benefits that include such items as the
Government’s contributions to an employee’s health
insurance, life insurance, and retirement.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 May 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
While TSA can accomplish a portion
of the vetting process using information
technology, there is a substantial need
for human resources to ensure timely,
complete, and accurate vetting results.
On average, TSA expects to process over
300 applicants each and every calendar
day over the next five years. Such
volume necessitates that various
personnel carry out the multitude of
threat assessment functions during the
vetting process.
• Vetting Managers—establish,
implement, operate, and monitor best
practices necessary for efficient threat
assessments.
• Vetting Analysts—provide a wide
range of communications, operations,
and administrative activities, including
written correspondence, budgetary
formulation and execution,
programmatic standards and
procedures.
• Transportation Security
Specialists—provide analysis of vetting
results and remediation of incomplete
data or incorrect data.
• Technology Specialists—manage
data ingest, processing, and reporting
for the STA process. Duties include
program architecture, requirements
development and implementation, data
information assurances and procedures,
and completion of risk and vulnerability
assessments.
• Business Management Specialists—
manage administrative services that
include budget formulation/execution,
human resource management, training,
and day-to-day office needs.
TSA estimates that personnel costs
will average approximately $2.6 million
in each of the first five years of the
program. Over that same period, TSA
estimates that over 130,000 individuals
will apply for STA services annually.
Accordingly, TSA will need to recover
approximately $20 from each applicant
to recover personnel costs fully.
A robust technical platform ensures
accurate and efficient threat assessment
services. While TSA will capitalize on
infrastructure investments already made
to implement prior STA services, new
technology investments are necessary to
modify existing capacity and to develop
further capabilities. For example, the
technology platform needs to be
enhanced to integrate an STA with a
five-year duration and to provide
sustained operational redundancy.
With regard to the comment that TSA
should allow submission of names in
batch, the current system will only
allow submission of information for one
individual at a time.
Comment: One association feared that
a large percentage of their freight
forwarders that are small businesses
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
would pass the cost to their shipper
clients, thereby increasing the cost of
transportation. Another commenter
complained that STA fees are
particularly burdensome to the trucking
industry that CCSP participants rely on
to transport their cargo. According to
this commenter, given the high
employee turnover that trucking
companies often experience, high STA
fees may cause truck drivers
transporting cargo to opt out of the
business thereby reducing competition.
One commenter was concerned that
they not only have to submit and pay
STAs for their direct employees but also
for those of any of their authorized
agents. This commenter suggested TSA
should allow an authorized agent to
submit and pay for their own STAs, and
that TSA should regulate all non-IAC
entities, such as haulers and ground
handling agents, so that they can share
in the costs of securing transportation.
TSA Response: TSA agrees that some
entities may pass on the costs of STA
fees to their customers. However, since
the STA requirement applies to all
populations included in this fee
calculation, TSA believes small
businesses will not be put at a
competitive disadvantage. For more
information, see Appendix A (page 153),
Economic Impacts on Existing CCSFs by
Size, in the Regulatory Evaluation
accompanying the 2011 rule.
TSA believes STA fees will not be
overly burdensome to the trucking
industry. The STA requirement does not
produce a competitive advantage for any
specific firm because the STA
requirement applies to all trucking
entities carrying screened cargo for
CCSFs. TSA does not prescribe how
companies must finance STA costs. A
firm may decide to pay for the STAs,
charge employees, or pass on the costs
to the CCSFs. In addition, an STA is
valid for five years regardless of place of
employment, so drivers will not have to
undergo an additional STA until their
current STA expires.
TSA is currently developing
enhancements to the existing Indirect
Air Carrier Management System
(IACMS) that will enable the authorized
agent to process and pay for their own
STAs. At this time, TSA has no plans to
expand the scope of the regulations to
include other entities beyond the air
carriers, IACs, and CCSFs.
Comment: An association commented
that the cost of the STA fee is high
because the current STA system is
highly flawed and redundant. For
example, IACs provide TSA names for
STAs, many of which have been
supplied several times over by other
IACs. This association recommends that
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2012 / Notices
TSA build a ‘‘hosting portal’’ through
which IACs can access a database to
determine whether an additional filing
by a particular IAC is needed.
TSA Response: The existing TSA
portal for validating an STA enables any
regulated party with access to the
IACMS to view and validate a current
STA in their profile without the need to
resubmit payment and process a new
STA. Thus, TSA does not require that
an individual obtain more than one
STA. Rather, the decision of whether to
require an individual to obtain more
than one STA is a business decision
made by regulated parties.
Comments: Several commenters
believe that TSA grossly underestimated
the population of those subject to STAs
by limiting the population to IACs and
certified cargo screening program
(CCSP) participants. These commenters
indicated that TSA must include all
entities that are subject to STA
requirements, not merely those in the
CCSP. These commenters stated that
other components of the aviation and
cargo industry, such as employees of
full all-cargo carriers, passenger air
carriers, airports, and trucking
companies, requiring STAs should be
included in this fee calculation.
According to these commenters, TSA
would be able to leverage existing
technology and infrastructure and
thereby process fees at lower costs.
One commenter was concerned that
TSA did not include direct air carrier
employees subject to the STA
requirements, but who receive them at
no extra cost, as part of the requirement
to obtain Security Identification Display
Area (SIDA) IDs.
Another commenter requested that if
TSA intends to limit the population to
IACs and other CCSP participants, then
TSA should clearly limit applicability of
the proposed fees to those persons
engaged in the CCSP. Another
commenter submitted that even within
the IAC and CCSP groups, the fee report
estimates of 1,000 STAs that would be
needed for ‘‘super’’ 10 shippers was too
low.
TSA Response: TSA appreciates the
questions regarding which populations
are included in the STA fee, and
provides clarification of TSA’s
population estimates below. In the 2011
rule, TSA combined populations from
the 2006 rule including personnel of
aircraft operators, foreign air carriers,
and IACs with unescorted access to
cargo, with the CCSF population. To
10 For further information on the categorization of
shippers, refer to the Fee Report. In the Fee Report
on page 13, TSA describes the categorization of
shippers as small, medium, large, and super.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 May 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
estimate the size of the ‘‘IAC’’
population for the 2011 rule, TSA used
the actual historical number of STA
enrollments of aircraft operator, foreign
air carrier, and IAC personnel. Thus, the
population estimate in the 2011 rule
properly considers not only IAC
personnel, but also personnel of aircraft
operators handling cargo off airport, allcargo operators, foreign air carriers, and
CCSFs.11 Therefore, since the STA fee
takes into account all the population
segments noted above, it is not limited
to IACs and CCSFs.
The cost and population estimates for
airport personnel required to obtain
SIDA IDs were not included in the fee
models for this rulemaking because
STAs for holders of SIDA IDs require
different processes within TSA and it
would not be appropriate to include
these STA holders in the population
estimates for determining the STA fee.
TSA may address this population in a
future rulemaking.
CCSF STA projections in the 2011
rule, including those for ‘‘super’’
shippers, were based on expected firm
enrollment into the CCSP. The 1,000
STAs per super shipper was TSA’s best
estimate at the time the 2011 rule was
completed. This estimate is an average,
with some super shippers requiring
more and some requiring fewer STAs.
Comment: One commenter stated that
it did not make sense that a decrease in
the population results in an increase in
the STA fee.
TSA Response: The STA fee is set to
recover fully the cost of the services
provided to STA applicants. As such,
the fee reflects both the service costs
and the number of beneficiaries
receiving services. It is important to
note that a large portion of the estimated
service costs are fixed and do not vary
based on the number of estimated
applicants. In addition, there are half as
many applicants in the 2011 rule from
which the sustained service costs must
be recovered. This, in turn, caused the
fee per person to increase.
Comment: A number of commenters
stated that it is incorrect for TSA to
assume that the private sector should
bear 100 percent of all costs related to
the STA process. According to such
commenters, security is an inherently
governmental function, and it is
reasonable to assume that public funds
11 While the 2011 rule and the Fee Report used
the terms ‘‘IACs’’ and ‘‘CCSFs’’ to describe the
populations used to determine the fee, TSA has
verified that the actual populations used to
calculate the fee include personnel of aircraft
operators, foreign air carriers, and all-cargo
operators, as well as CCSFs. TSA also notes that the
Regulatory Evaluation only considers the STA costs
imposed by the 2009 IFR and 2011 rule, and thus
only addresses the costs of an STA for CCSFs.
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30545
should cover at least some portion of the
STA costs. Another commenter argued
that the private sector is already bearing
a significant portion of the costs of the
STA by managing the process to provide
and update information on its
employees.
TSA Response: TSA is required to
collect fees to offset all costs of
providing credentialing and background
investigations in accordance with 6
U.S.C 469. As part of this mandate, TSA
will work within Federal guidelines to
ensure the most efficient use of
resources to minimize the cost of vetting
services. Further, TSA is mandated by
statute to review fees no less than every
two years to ensure that fees are set to
recover the full cost of vetting services.
If the fees are too high or too low, TSA
will adjust the fee.
Comment: One commenter alleges
that TSA has violated the terms of
Executive Order 13563 (EO 13563)
because the Regulatory Evaluation for
the 2011 rule does not separately
address the costs and benefits of the
STA fee. This same commenter argues
that TSA never considered alternative
methods of conducting STAs, as
required by EO 13563, including the use
of outside contractors that might
perform the required checks for
substantially less.
TSA Response: TSA does not agree
that it violated the terms of EO 13563.
The STA fee is an integral part of the
implementation of the 2011 rule as it
provides the funding to offset the costs
of vetting services being provided to
STA applicants. As we have previously
discussed, TSA is required to recover all
costs of conducting vetting and
credentialing services by 6 U.S.C. 469.
Consequently, the benefits of the fee
include providing the full funding TSA
needs to operate the program and
allowing TSA to comply with the
requirement to recover all costs of
providing this unique service. TSA’s
Regulatory Evaluation included an
analysis of alternatives to achieving 100
percent screening of cargo transported
on passenger aircraft; TSA compared the
alternative of 100 percent screening
solely by air carriers to the alternative
of screening by participants of the CCSP
program as well as air carriers, as
established in the 2009 IFR. Both
alternatives encompass a requirement
that personnel with unescorted access to
cargo successfully complete an STA
conducted by TSA.
Finally, only the Federal Government
can access the consolidated Terrorist
Screening Database (TSDB), and must
first enter into a Memorandum of
Understanding with the Federal Bureau
of Investigation (FBI) with very specific
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
30546
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2012 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
access privileges and justifications.
Private entities such as outside
contractors are not provided access.
Checking applicants against the TSDB is
a central feature of the STA that TSA
conducts.
Comment: Some commenters
submitted that TSA should not base
such fees on inexact estimates of the
actual costs or the number of STAs that
will be required, and should hold the
STA fee in abeyance until TSA has
further dialogue with industry. Other
commenters recommended that TSA
wait to charge an STA fee until issuance
of the Standardized Vetting,
Adjudication, and Redress rule that TSA
is developing.
TSA Response: Under 6 U.S.C. 469,
TSA is currently required to fund
vetting and credentialing programs
through user fees. The STA fee is an
important part of TSA’s compliance
with this Congressional mandate.
Moreover, TSA does have sufficient
information to make a reasonable
estimate and has shared that
information in the 2011 rule. For these
reasons, TSA concludes that it would be
inappropriate to delay implementation
of the STA fee.
With regard to the Standardized
Vetting, Adjudication, and Redress
Services rulemaking to which the
commenter refers, TSA notes that this
initiative is still in the developmental
stages, and is not, therefore, a
reasonable basis for delaying any part of
this rulemaking.
Finally, in addition to the extensive
dialogue and industry outreach that
TSA conducted in the development of
air cargo security policy, industry has
had the opportunity to comment on this
STA fee through notice-and-comment
rulemaking.
Other STA Issues
Comment: A commenter stated that
their organization conducts Criminal
History Background Checks on all
prospective employees, and that
although these checks are not
fingerprint-based checks, they are
exhaustive. Accordingly, to avoid
duplication of time, effort, and cost, the
commenter requested that TSA accept
such background checks in lieu of
STAs.
TSA Response: TSA does not believe
that the name-based criminal check that
the commenter’s organization conducts
is comparable to the STA TSA conducts
on this population and is not sufficient
to provide the necessary level of
security needed in this industry. The
STA TSA conducts includes matching
names against the consolidated TSDB
and other Government data sources, to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 May 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
which private entities do not have
access. These databases contain
information relating to terrorist activity,
most of which is not criminal history
information.
Comment: One commenter stated that
the TSA criminal history records check
(CHRC) provides a greater degree of
security than the STA requirements, and
that to bring congruency among the STA
requirements, TSA ought to require
CHRCs immediately for workers with
unescorted access to cargo.
TSA Response: As TSA stated in the
response to comments in the 2011
rule,12 TSA agrees that CHRCs add a
level of security to the name-based STA
requirement. TSA intends to address the
CHRC requirement in the broader
context of all TSA programs.
Comment: One commenter
appreciated TSA’s recognition that the
STAs performed under the SIDA,
Commercial Driver’s License-Hazardous
Material Endorsement, Transportation
Workers Identification Card, and Free
and Secure Trade programs have been
deemed comparable to STAs performed
under the CCSP. This commenter states
that it is not clear whether a CCSP
facility operator is relieved of the
burden to submit personal identifying
information for each individual who has
been vetted under these comparable
programs, because the CCSP is designed
on a facility-specific basis rather than an
individual enrollment basis. This
commenter believes that TSA should be
moving toward a common program
platform for security vetting programs
and should grant full reciprocity to
individuals who have been vetted
against the TSDB, no matter what
program the STA was first required
under.
TSA Response: When an individual
asserts that he or she has successfully
completed an STA comparable to the
STA required under the 2011 rule, TSA
requires that the individual present the
credential that corresponds to the
comparable STA to the operator so that
the operator may retain a copy, and that
the individual notify the operator when
the credential expires. 49 CFR
1540.203(i)(1) and (2). TSA does not
require the submission of personal
identifying information to TSA for an
individual who has been vetted under a
comparable STA.
As we understand this comment, the
commenter suggests that TSA should
implement a system for conducting and
administering STAs that is focused on
the individual rather than the employer
for which, or the facility in which, he
or she currently works. TSA may
12 76
PO 00000
FR 51854.
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
consider such a process in a future
rulemaking.
Issued in Arlington, Virginia, on May 17,
2012.
John S. Pistole,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012–12555 Filed 5–22–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR–5604–N–06]
Notice of Proposed Information
Collection: Comment Request; Form
HUD–40221(rev) ‘‘LOCCS/VRS SelfHelp Homeownership Opportunity
Program Payment Voucher’’
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Community Planning and
Development, HUD.
ACTION: Notice of proposed information
collection.
AGENCY:
The proposed information
collection requirement described below
will be submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review, as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act. The Department is
soliciting public comments on the
subject proposal.
DATES: Comment Due Date: July 23,
2012.
SUMMARY:
Interested persons are
invited to submit comments regarding
this proposal. Comments should refer to
the proposal by name and/or OMB
Control Number and should be sent to:
Rudene Thomas, Reports Liaison
Officer, U.S. Department or Housing and
Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street
SW., Room 7233, Washington, DC
20410–4500.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ginger Macomber, SHOP Program
Manager, Office of Affordable Housing
Programs, U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development, 451 Seventh
Street SW., Room 7162, Washington, DC
20410–4500; telephone 202–402–4605
(this is not a toll-free number) or by
email at ginger.macomber@hud.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Department is submitting the proposed
information collection to OMB for
review, as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended).
This Notice is soliciting comments
from members of the public and affected
agencies concerning the proposed
collection of information to: (1) Evaluate
whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30542-30546]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-12555]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Transportation Security Administration
[Docket Nos. TSA-2004-19515 and TSA-2009-0018]
RIN 1652-AA64
Air Cargo Screening Fees
AGENCY: Transportation Security Administration, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of fees.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice establishes user fees for certain security threat
assessments (STAs) performed by the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA). In the Air Cargo Screening final rule published
on August 18, 2011, TSA proposed a fee range for security threat
[[Page 30543]]
assessments of between $31 and $51 and sought comment on the fee range
and on the methodology used to calculate the fee. The final rule stated
that TSA would announce the final fee amount in a notice in the Federal
Register. This notice establishes a fee of $41 for certain security
threat assessments in the air cargo program and responds to public
comments made regarding the fee range.
DATES: Effective June 22, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Gambone, Director of Revenue,
TSA-14, Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12th Street,
Arlington, VA 20598-6014; telephone (571) 227-2323; facsimile (571)
227-2904; email tsa-fees@dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of 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.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collection.action?collectionCode=FR to view
the daily published Federal Register edition; or accessing the ``Search
the Federal Register by Citation'' in the ``Related Resources'' column
on the left, if you need to do a Simple or Advanced search for
information, such as a type of document that crosses multiple agencies
or dates; 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
individual in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Make sure to
identify the docket number of this rulemaking.
Background
On May 26, 2006, TSA issued the Air Cargo Security Requirements
final rule (2006 rulemaking),\1\ which, in part, required certain cargo
workers of aircraft operators, foreign air carriers, and indirect air
carriers (IACs) to undergo an STA conducted by TSA. TSA checks a
variety of government databases to verify the individual's identity and
determine that he or she does not pose a security threat to
transportation or national security. TSA is authorized to collect fees
to offset the cost of conducting STAs. 6 U.S.C. 469. The 2006
rulemaking established a fee for STAs of $28, and incorporated the fee
amount in the civil aviation security regulation. 49 CFR 1540.209.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 71 FR 30478.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 16, 2009, TSA published the Air Cargo Screening
interim final rule (IFR) (2009 IFR),\2\ which establishes requirements
for certain additional individuals to obtain an STA. These individuals
are certified cargo screening facilities (CCSF) employees and
authorized representatives that screen cargo, and have unescorted
access to screened cargo or carry out certain other cargo security
duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 74 FR 47672.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2009 IFR amended Sec. 1540.209 to remove the specific fee
amount from the regulatory text. In the preamble to the 2009 IFR, we
described how TSA would calculate the fee for STAs and stated that the
fee would be between $13 and $21, depending on the size of the
population and whether there are changes to the costs involved in the
calculation. TSA explained that TSA would publish specific fee amounts
and changes to fee amounts as a notice in the Federal Register.\3\ We
invited comment on the new proposed fee, and the methodology and
population estimates we used to arrive at the proposed fee. Since the
issuance of the IFR, TSA has not charged a fee for STA processing,
because the specific fee amount was removed from the regulatory text
and was not published elsewhere.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 74 FR 47684.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA has further reviewed costs and population data since the IFR
was issued. On August 18, 2011, TSA published the Air Cargo Screening
final rule (2011 rule) \4\ that responded to comments received on the
IFR. The 2011 rule also explained that due to significant decreases in
the population estimate, the fee necessary to recover TSA's costs of
conducting threat assessments would increase. TSA proposed a new fee
range between $31 and $51. We invited comment on the new proposed fee,
and the methodology we used to arrive at the new proposed fee range.
The 2011 rule stated that TSA would publish specific fee amounts and
changes to fee amounts as a notice in the Federal Register.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 76 FR 51848. Section 1540.209 of the 2006 rulemaking stated
that a fee of $28 is required for TSA to conduct an STA. The 2009
IFR, however, revised Sec. 1540.209 so that the regulation no
longer contains a specific fee amount. Section 1540.209 now states
that TSA will publish fee amounts and any revisions to the fee
amounts as a notice in the Federal Register.
\5\ 76 FR 51857.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2011 rule also stated that the ``Air Cargo Screening Security
Threat Assessment Fee Development Report'' (Fee Report) provided
additional detailed information regarding the fee. However, TSA
inadvertently omitted to place the report in the public docket.
Accordingly, on August 25, 2011, TSA published a correction notice in
the Federal Register (August 25 notice) \6\ explaining the omission and
indicating that TSA placed the Fee Report in the public docket and
reopened the comment period on the fee for an additional 30 days. TSA
responds to comments submitted on the fee below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 76 FR 53080.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fee Amount
By this notice, TSA announces the final fee of $41 for STAs for
employees of aircraft operators, foreign air carriers, IACs, and CCSFs
who have or are applying for unescorted access to cargo to be
transported on passenger aircraft, screen cargo, supervise the
screening of cargo, or perform certain other security functions as
provided for in Sec. 1540.201(a).
As TSA explained in the 2011 rule,\7\ changes in the population
estimates necessitated that TSA propose an increase in the fee range to
$31 to $51.\8\ In summarizing the changes from the 2009 IFR to the 2011
rule, the five-year cost estimate for threat assessment services
increased by approximately $4.2 million, and the five-year population
estimate decreased significantly by approximately 551,000. Because of
the substantial decrease in population, there will be fewer applicants
from which fixed costs of threat assessment services can be recovered,
thereby increasing the per applicant fee. To recover the full cost of
the STA services from the estimated population described in Sec.
1540.201, TSA is announcing a fee of $41.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 76 FR 51857.
\8\ In the 2009 IFR, the fee range was $13 to $21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-
576, 104 Stat. 2838, Nov. 15, 1990), TSA is required to review fees no
less than every two years. 31 U.S.C. 3512. Upon review, if TSA finds
that the fees are either too high (that is, total fees exceed the total
cost to provide the services) or too low (that is, total fees do not
cover the total costs to provide the services), TSA will adjust the fee
accordingly.
Comments on the STA Fee Calculation and Other Issues Relating to STAs
TSA received comments from 13 commenters on the 2011 rule and the
August 25 notice relating to the STA fee. These comments are addressed
below.
[[Page 30544]]
STA Fees
Comment: Several commenters expressed the concern that the proposed
fee range is excessive and too expensive for industry to bear,
especially at this time of economic downturn. One commenter stated that
the fee amount for the name checks component of the fee was
disproportionate to the level of administrative costs the agency incurs
by checking names against terrorists data bases. Additional commenters
believed that an average annual personnel cost of $134,000 is
overstated.
Another commenter maintained that the information technology
platform/systems component of the fee was unnecessary, as this system
has been in place since 2006, and the commenter believes that TSA
should not charge for the development of a system already in place.
One commenter asserted that a search of the applicant's name
through various databases is primarily conducted by electronic means,
not requiring a large amount of personnel, and that other necessary
functions for the STA are carried out by IACs/CCSFs' Security
Coordinators, further reducing TSA's need for personnel in the STA
process. A commenter suggested that if TSA would allow submission of
names in batch format, versus one at a time, less staff would be needed
for the name check.
TSA Response: While TSA recognizes the STA fee will impose a new
financial burden on the industry during a period of economic stress,
TSA is required by statute to collect fees to recover all costs of
conducting vetting and credentialing services. 6 U.S.C. 469. As part of
this Congressional mandate, TSA works within Federal guidelines to
ensure the most efficient use of resources to minimize the cost of
vetting services. The STA fee is set to recover only the cost of
vetting services being provided to STA applicants, and better aligns
cost recovery from those that directly benefit from this unique
security service. Further, TSA conducts regular reviews to ensure that
fees are set to recover the full cost of vetting services.
TSA used actual cost data from 2009 to determine that the average
annual fully burdened \9\ cost of personnel necessary for this vetting
service was $134,000. TSA used this actual figure to estimate future
personnel costs accurately over the five-year period of the cost model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The fully burdened employee cost is comprised of salary and
benefits that include such items as the Government's contributions
to an employee's health insurance, life insurance, and retirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While TSA can accomplish a portion of the vetting process using
information technology, there is a substantial need for human resources
to ensure timely, complete, and accurate vetting results. On average,
TSA expects to process over 300 applicants each and every calendar day
over the next five years. Such volume necessitates that various
personnel carry out the multitude of threat assessment functions during
the vetting process.
Vetting Managers--establish, implement, operate, and
monitor best practices necessary for efficient threat assessments.
Vetting Analysts--provide a wide range of communications,
operations, and administrative activities, including written
correspondence, budgetary formulation and execution, programmatic
standards and procedures.
Transportation Security Specialists--provide analysis of
vetting results and remediation of incomplete data or incorrect data.
Technology Specialists--manage data ingest, processing,
and reporting for the STA process. Duties include program architecture,
requirements development and implementation, data information
assurances and procedures, and completion of risk and vulnerability
assessments.
Business Management Specialists--manage administrative
services that include budget formulation/execution, human resource
management, training, and day-to-day office needs.
TSA estimates that personnel costs will average approximately $2.6
million in each of the first five years of the program. Over that same
period, TSA estimates that over 130,000 individuals will apply for STA
services annually. Accordingly, TSA will need to recover approximately
$20 from each applicant to recover personnel costs fully.
A robust technical platform ensures accurate and efficient threat
assessment services. While TSA will capitalize on infrastructure
investments already made to implement prior STA services, new
technology investments are necessary to modify existing capacity and to
develop further capabilities. For example, the technology platform
needs to be enhanced to integrate an STA with a five-year duration and
to provide sustained operational redundancy.
With regard to the comment that TSA should allow submission of
names in batch, the current system will only allow submission of
information for one individual at a time.
Comment: One association feared that a large percentage of their
freight forwarders that are small businesses would pass the cost to
their shipper clients, thereby increasing the cost of transportation.
Another commenter complained that STA fees are particularly burdensome
to the trucking industry that CCSP participants rely on to transport
their cargo. According to this commenter, given the high employee
turnover that trucking companies often experience, high STA fees may
cause truck drivers transporting cargo to opt out of the business
thereby reducing competition.
One commenter was concerned that they not only have to submit and
pay STAs for their direct employees but also for those of any of their
authorized agents. This commenter suggested TSA should allow an
authorized agent to submit and pay for their own STAs, and that TSA
should regulate all non-IAC entities, such as haulers and ground
handling agents, so that they can share in the costs of securing
transportation.
TSA Response: TSA agrees that some entities may pass on the costs
of STA fees to their customers. However, since the STA requirement
applies to all populations included in this fee calculation, TSA
believes small businesses will not be put at a competitive
disadvantage. For more information, see Appendix A (page 153), Economic
Impacts on Existing CCSFs by Size, in the Regulatory Evaluation
accompanying the 2011 rule.
TSA believes STA fees will not be overly burdensome to the trucking
industry. The STA requirement does not produce a competitive advantage
for any specific firm because the STA requirement applies to all
trucking entities carrying screened cargo for CCSFs. TSA does not
prescribe how companies must finance STA costs. A firm may decide to
pay for the STAs, charge employees, or pass on the costs to the CCSFs.
In addition, an STA is valid for five years regardless of place of
employment, so drivers will not have to undergo an additional STA until
their current STA expires.
TSA is currently developing enhancements to the existing Indirect
Air Carrier Management System (IACMS) that will enable the authorized
agent to process and pay for their own STAs. At this time, TSA has no
plans to expand the scope of the regulations to include other entities
beyond the air carriers, IACs, and CCSFs.
Comment: An association commented that the cost of the STA fee is
high because the current STA system is highly flawed and redundant. For
example, IACs provide TSA names for STAs, many of which have been
supplied several times over by other IACs. This association recommends
that
[[Page 30545]]
TSA build a ``hosting portal'' through which IACs can access a database
to determine whether an additional filing by a particular IAC is
needed.
TSA Response: The existing TSA portal for validating an STA enables
any regulated party with access to the IACMS to view and validate a
current STA in their profile without the need to resubmit payment and
process a new STA. Thus, TSA does not require that an individual obtain
more than one STA. Rather, the decision of whether to require an
individual to obtain more than one STA is a business decision made by
regulated parties.
Comments: Several commenters believe that TSA grossly
underestimated the population of those subject to STAs by limiting the
population to IACs and certified cargo screening program (CCSP)
participants. These commenters indicated that TSA must include all
entities that are subject to STA requirements, not merely those in the
CCSP. These commenters stated that other components of the aviation and
cargo industry, such as employees of full all-cargo carriers, passenger
air carriers, airports, and trucking companies, requiring STAs should
be included in this fee calculation. According to these commenters, TSA
would be able to leverage existing technology and infrastructure and
thereby process fees at lower costs.
One commenter was concerned that TSA did not include direct air
carrier employees subject to the STA requirements, but who receive them
at no extra cost, as part of the requirement to obtain Security
Identification Display Area (SIDA) IDs.
Another commenter requested that if TSA intends to limit the
population to IACs and other CCSP participants, then TSA should clearly
limit applicability of the proposed fees to those persons engaged in
the CCSP. Another commenter submitted that even within the IAC and CCSP
groups, the fee report estimates of 1,000 STAs that would be needed for
``super'' \10\ shippers was too low.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ For further information on the categorization of shippers,
refer to the Fee Report. In the Fee Report on page 13, TSA describes
the categorization of shippers as small, medium, large, and super.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA Response: TSA appreciates the questions regarding which
populations are included in the STA fee, and provides clarification of
TSA's population estimates below. In the 2011 rule, TSA combined
populations from the 2006 rule including personnel of aircraft
operators, foreign air carriers, and IACs with unescorted access to
cargo, with the CCSF population. To estimate the size of the ``IAC''
population for the 2011 rule, TSA used the actual historical number of
STA enrollments of aircraft operator, foreign air carrier, and IAC
personnel. Thus, the population estimate in the 2011 rule properly
considers not only IAC personnel, but also personnel of aircraft
operators handling cargo off airport, all-cargo operators, foreign air
carriers, and CCSFs.\11\ Therefore, since the STA fee takes into
account all the population segments noted above, it is not limited to
IACs and CCSFs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ While the 2011 rule and the Fee Report used the terms
``IACs'' and ``CCSFs'' to describe the populations used to determine
the fee, TSA has verified that the actual populations used to
calculate the fee include personnel of aircraft operators, foreign
air carriers, and all-cargo operators, as well as CCSFs. TSA also
notes that the Regulatory Evaluation only considers the STA costs
imposed by the 2009 IFR and 2011 rule, and thus only addresses the
costs of an STA for CCSFs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The cost and population estimates for airport personnel required to
obtain SIDA IDs were not included in the fee models for this rulemaking
because STAs for holders of SIDA IDs require different processes within
TSA and it would not be appropriate to include these STA holders in the
population estimates for determining the STA fee. TSA may address this
population in a future rulemaking.
CCSF STA projections in the 2011 rule, including those for
``super'' shippers, were based on expected firm enrollment into the
CCSP. The 1,000 STAs per super shipper was TSA's best estimate at the
time the 2011 rule was completed. This estimate is an average, with
some super shippers requiring more and some requiring fewer STAs.
Comment: One commenter stated that it did not make sense that a
decrease in the population results in an increase in the STA fee.
TSA Response: The STA fee is set to recover fully the cost of the
services provided to STA applicants. As such, the fee reflects both the
service costs and the number of beneficiaries receiving services. It is
important to note that a large portion of the estimated service costs
are fixed and do not vary based on the number of estimated applicants.
In addition, there are half as many applicants in the 2011 rule from
which the sustained service costs must be recovered. This, in turn,
caused the fee per person to increase.
Comment: A number of commenters stated that it is incorrect for TSA
to assume that the private sector should bear 100 percent of all costs
related to the STA process. According to such commenters, security is
an inherently governmental function, and it is reasonable to assume
that public funds should cover at least some portion of the STA costs.
Another commenter argued that the private sector is already bearing a
significant portion of the costs of the STA by managing the process to
provide and update information on its employees.
TSA Response: TSA is required to collect fees to offset all costs
of providing credentialing and background investigations in accordance
with 6 U.S.C 469. As part of this mandate, TSA will work within Federal
guidelines to ensure the most efficient use of resources to minimize
the cost of vetting services. Further, TSA is mandated by statute to
review fees no less than every two years to ensure that fees are set to
recover the full cost of vetting services. If the fees are too high or
too low, TSA will adjust the fee.
Comment: One commenter alleges that TSA has violated the terms of
Executive Order 13563 (EO 13563) because the Regulatory Evaluation for
the 2011 rule does not separately address the costs and benefits of the
STA fee. This same commenter argues that TSA never considered
alternative methods of conducting STAs, as required by EO 13563,
including the use of outside contractors that might perform the
required checks for substantially less.
TSA Response: TSA does not agree that it violated the terms of EO
13563. The STA fee is an integral part of the implementation of the
2011 rule as it provides the funding to offset the costs of vetting
services being provided to STA applicants. As we have previously
discussed, TSA is required to recover all costs of conducting vetting
and credentialing services by 6 U.S.C. 469. Consequently, the benefits
of the fee include providing the full funding TSA needs to operate the
program and allowing TSA to comply with the requirement to recover all
costs of providing this unique service. TSA's Regulatory Evaluation
included an analysis of alternatives to achieving 100 percent screening
of cargo transported on passenger aircraft; TSA compared the
alternative of 100 percent screening solely by air carriers to the
alternative of screening by participants of the CCSP program as well as
air carriers, as established in the 2009 IFR. Both alternatives
encompass a requirement that personnel with unescorted access to cargo
successfully complete an STA conducted by TSA.
Finally, only the Federal Government can access the consolidated
Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB), and must first enter into a
Memorandum of Understanding with the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI) with very specific
[[Page 30546]]
access privileges and justifications. Private entities such as outside
contractors are not provided access. Checking applicants against the
TSDB is a central feature of the STA that TSA conducts.
Comment: Some commenters submitted that TSA should not base such
fees on inexact estimates of the actual costs or the number of STAs
that will be required, and should hold the STA fee in abeyance until
TSA has further dialogue with industry. Other commenters recommended
that TSA wait to charge an STA fee until issuance of the Standardized
Vetting, Adjudication, and Redress rule that TSA is developing.
TSA Response: Under 6 U.S.C. 469, TSA is currently required to fund
vetting and credentialing programs through user fees. The STA fee is an
important part of TSA's compliance with this Congressional mandate.
Moreover, TSA does have sufficient information to make a reasonable
estimate and has shared that information in the 2011 rule. For these
reasons, TSA concludes that it would be inappropriate to delay
implementation of the STA fee.
With regard to the Standardized Vetting, Adjudication, and Redress
Services rulemaking to which the commenter refers, TSA notes that this
initiative is still in the developmental stages, and is not, therefore,
a reasonable basis for delaying any part of this rulemaking.
Finally, in addition to the extensive dialogue and industry
outreach that TSA conducted in the development of air cargo security
policy, industry has had the opportunity to comment on this STA fee
through notice-and-comment rulemaking.
Other STA Issues
Comment: A commenter stated that their organization conducts
Criminal History Background Checks on all prospective employees, and
that although these checks are not fingerprint-based checks, they are
exhaustive. Accordingly, to avoid duplication of time, effort, and
cost, the commenter requested that TSA accept such background checks in
lieu of STAs.
TSA Response: TSA does not believe that the name-based criminal
check that the commenter's organization conducts is comparable to the
STA TSA conducts on this population and is not sufficient to provide
the necessary level of security needed in this industry. The STA TSA
conducts includes matching names against the consolidated TSDB and
other Government data sources, to which private entities do not have
access. These databases contain information relating to terrorist
activity, most of which is not criminal history information.
Comment: One commenter stated that the TSA criminal history records
check (CHRC) provides a greater degree of security than the STA
requirements, and that to bring congruency among the STA requirements,
TSA ought to require CHRCs immediately for workers with unescorted
access to cargo.
TSA Response: As TSA stated in the response to comments in the 2011
rule,\12\ TSA agrees that CHRCs add a level of security to the name-
based STA requirement. TSA intends to address the CHRC requirement in
the broader context of all TSA programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 76 FR 51854.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment: One commenter appreciated TSA's recognition that the STAs
performed under the SIDA, Commercial Driver's License-Hazardous
Material Endorsement, Transportation Workers Identification Card, and
Free and Secure Trade programs have been deemed comparable to STAs
performed under the CCSP. This commenter states that it is not clear
whether a CCSP facility operator is relieved of the burden to submit
personal identifying information for each individual who has been
vetted under these comparable programs, because the CCSP is designed on
a facility-specific basis rather than an individual enrollment basis.
This commenter believes that TSA should be moving toward a common
program platform for security vetting programs and should grant full
reciprocity to individuals who have been vetted against the TSDB, no
matter what program the STA was first required under.
TSA Response: When an individual asserts that he or she has
successfully completed an STA comparable to the STA required under the
2011 rule, TSA requires that the individual present the credential that
corresponds to the comparable STA to the operator so that the operator
may retain a copy, and that the individual notify the operator when the
credential expires. 49 CFR 1540.203(i)(1) and (2). TSA does not require
the submission of personal identifying information to TSA for an
individual who has been vetted under a comparable STA.
As we understand this comment, the commenter suggests that TSA
should implement a system for conducting and administering STAs that is
focused on the individual rather than the employer for which, or the
facility in which, he or she currently works. TSA may consider such a
process in a future rulemaking.
Issued in Arlington, Virginia, on May 17, 2012.
John S. Pistole,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012-12555 Filed 5-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-05-P