Federal Personnel Vetting Core Doctrine, 2705-2709 [2021-00547]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 13, 2021 / Notices
museums, libraries, and related
organizations through grant making,
research, and policy development. Our
vision is a nation where museums and
libraries work together to transform the
lives of individuals and communities.
To learn more, visit www.imls.gov.
II. Current Actions
The Collections Assessment for
Preservation (CAP) program allows a
qualified conservator to study of all of
a museum’s collections, buildings and
building systems, as well as its policies
and procedures relating to collections
care. Participants who complete the
program receive an assessment report
with prioritized recommendations to
improve collections care. The forms
submitted for public review in this
Notice are application forms for
assessors and participating museums;
pre-visit site questionnaires for
participating museums; CAP program
evaluation forms for participating
museums and assessors; and program
Outcomes Based Evaluation forms.
Agency: Institute of Museum and
Library Services.
Title: IMLS Collections Assessment
for Preservation Forms.
OMB Control Number: 3137–NEW.
Agency Number: 3137.
Respondents/Affected Public:
Museum professionals and professional
conservators.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Respondents: TBD.
Frequency of Response: TBD.
Average Minutes per Response: TBD.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: TBD.
Cost Burden (dollars): TBD.
Public Comments Invited: Comments
submitted in response to this Notice
will be summarized and/or included in
the request for OMB’s clearance of this
information collection.
Dated: January 8, 2021.
Kim Miller,
Senior Grants Management Specialist,
Institute of Museum and Library Services.
[FR Doc. 2021–00548 Filed 1–12–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7036–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 30–10716; NRC–2020–0214]
Sigma-Aldrich Company; Fort Mims
Site
Correction
In notice document 2020–28065
appearing on pages 83109–83111 in the
issue of Monday, December 21, 2020,
make the following correction:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Jan 12, 2021
Jkt 253001
(1) On page 83109, in the first
column, in the DATES section, change
‘‘January 20, 2021’’ to read ‘‘January 21,
2021.’’
[FR Doc. C1–2020–28065 Filed 1–12–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1301–00–D
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
Federal Personnel Vetting Core
Doctrine
Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) and Office of the
Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).
ACTION: General statement of policy.
AGENCY:
This action by the Acting
OPM Director in the capacity as the
Suitability and Credentialing Executive
Agent, in consultation with the Director
of National Intelligence (DNI) in the
capacity as the Security Executive
Agent, establishes a Federal Personnel
Vetting Core Doctrine to guide
transformative efforts to reform the U.S.
Government personnel security vetting
processes. This policy statement is
consistent with direction established by
the President in an Executive order
entitled Reforming Processes Related to
Suitability for Government Employment,
Fitness for Contractor Employees, and
Eligibility for Access to Classified
National Security Information,
mandating the Executive Agents to
align, to the greatest extent practicable,
the Federal workforce vetting processes
to promote mobility, improve
efficiencies and move towards an
enhanced risk management approach.
With the issuance of this general
statement of policy, the Federal
Personnel Vetting Core Doctrine
establishes the philosophy for the
Government’s personnel vetting
program and will guide development of
Government-wide and agency policy.
This Core Doctrine defines the
personnel vetting mission, its guiding
principles, key supporting processes,
and policy priorities.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before February 12, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by the docket number or
Regulation Identifier Number (Z–RIN)
for this document, by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for sending comments.
All submissions received must
include the agency name and docket
number or RIN (RIN 3206–ZA02,
October 2020) for this document. The
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2705
general policy for comments and other
submissions from members of the public
is to make these submissions available
for public viewing at https://
www.regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information. OPM will prepare and post
a public response to major concerns
raised in the comments, as appropriate,
on its guidance Web portal, either before
or when the guidance document is
finalized and issued.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dorianna Rice at Suitability Executive
Agent Programs, OPM, SuitEA@opm.gov
or (202) 606–8460 and/or National
Counterintelligence and Security
Center, ODNI, at SecEA@dni.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority for This Action
Executive Order 13467, Reforming
Processes Related to Suitability for
Government Employment, Fitness for
Contractor Employees, and Eligibility
for Access to Classified National
Security Information (June 30, 2008), as
amended, established the DNI as the
Security Executive Agent and the
Director of OPM as the Suitability &
Credentialing Executive Agent.1 ODNI
and OPM are the primary entities
responsible for policy and oversight of
the Federal Government’s personnel
vetting process. The ODNI and OPM are
issuing this general statement of policy
to inform Federal agencies and the
public of a new framework designed to
guide the fundamental transformation of
the Federal Government’s personnel
vetting process. All other applicable
authorities are cited within the body of
the general statement of policy below. 5
U.S.C. 552(a)(1)(D) provides that
agencies publish their general
1 Previously, OPM was already responsible for
issuing the standards by which candidates for the
competitive and senior executive service were to be
assessed for entry into the civil service, pursuant to
the President’s statutory authority to establish the
criteria for entry into the competitive service, and
his delegation of that authority to OPM through the
Civil Service Rules. 5 U.S.C. 3301, 3302; E.O.
10577, Civil Service Rules II, and V, codified at 5
CFR parts 2 and 5, as amended. Under President
Clinton’s E.O. 12968 (Aug. 2, 1995), the Security
Policy Board and successor Policy Coordinating
Committee were responsible for recommending
standards to the President by which eligibility for
access to classified information was to be
determined. With President George W. Bush’s
promulgation of E.O. 13467, the Director of
National Intelligence assumed that function. E.O.
13467, and subsequent Executive Orders, have also
made OPM responsible for issuing standards related
to for eligibility for logical or physical access to
Government systems and facilities; fitness for
performing work on behalf of the Government
under a contract; and fitness for appointment to the
excepted service.
E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM
13JAN1
2706
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 13, 2021 / Notices
statements of policy in the Federal
Register for the guidance of the public.
The contents of this document do not
have the force and effect of law and are
not meant to bind the public in any
way, except as authorized by law or
incorporated into a contract. This
document is intended to provide clarity
to the public regarding existing
requirements under the law or agency
policies and to inform agencies of the
framework that will guide their
implementation of existing legal
requirements, and any new
requirements that are adopted. This
document was created to explain to
agencies the underlying philosophies
that should animate the implementation
of their responsibilities with respect to
adjudicating suitability or fitness,
eligibility to hold a position that is
national security sensitive, and
eligibility for logical or physical access
to agency systems or facilities.
Regulatory Impact
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866
direct agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). Executive Order 13563
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of
reducing costs, of harmonizing rules,
and of promoting flexibility. This
guidance has been reviewed by OMB
and designated a ‘‘significant regulatory
action,’’ under Executive Order 12866.
However, it is not economically
significant.
Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation
As required by Executive Orders
13891 and 13609, OPM and ODNI have
concluded that this guidance document
is not a significant regulation having
significant international impacts.
Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
This guidance is not expected to be
subject to the requirements of E.O.
13771(82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017)
because it is expected to impose no
more than de minimis costs.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
OPM and ODNI certify that this
guidance document will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
because it will apply only to Federal
agencies.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Jan 12, 2021
Jkt 253001
Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995
This guidance will not result in the
expenditure by state, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
in any year and it will not significantly
or uniquely affect small governments.
Therefore, no actions were deemed
necessary under the provisions of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995.
Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act (5
U.S.C. 801 et seq.) requires rules (as
defined in 5 U.S.C. 804) to be submitted
to Congress before taking effect. OPM
will submit to Congress and the
Comptroller General of the United
States a report regarding the issuance of
this action before its effective date, as
required by 5 U.S.C. 801. This action is
not major as defined by the
Congressional Review Act (CRA) (5
U.S.C. 804).
Paperwork Reduction Act
This guidance does not impose any
new reporting or record-keeping
requirements subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
I. Background: Trusted Workforce 2.0
Effective Government operations
require that the Federal Government’s
workforce be trusted to deliver on the
mission, provide excellent service, and
demonstrate effective stewardship of
taxpayer funds. Recognizing that
establishing and maintaining trust 2 is
the core goal of the Federal personnel
vetting program, the Security Executive
Agent and the Suitability and
Credentialing Executive Agent in
coordination and consultation with the
Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security (USD(I&S))
and the Deputy Director for
Management of OMB, in their roles as
Principal Members of the Security,
Suitability and Credentialing
Performance Accountability Council
(PAC), have initiated the ‘‘Trusted
Workforce 2.0’’ (TW 2.0)
transformational efforts to provide a
2 The nature of the trust determination depends
on the legal requirements for each vetting program.
Thus for suitability and fitness determinations the
trust consideration is to ensure that admission into
the Civil Service will ‘‘best promote the efficiency
of that service,’’ by ascertaining ‘‘the fitness of
applicants . . . as to character . . . for the
employment sought’’ (5 U.S.C. 3301); for national
security eligibility the trust consideration is to
ensure that eligibility is ‘‘clearly consistent with the
national security interests of the United States,’’
where adjudication of past conduct ‘‘is only an
attempt to predict . . . possible future behavior’’
and ‘‘does not equate with passing judgment upon
the individual’s character.’’ (E.O. 12968, sec. 3.1;
Dep’t of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 528 (1988)).
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
roadmap for reformed and innovative
Federal personnel vetting.
In March 2018, ODNI and OPM
launched the TW 2.0 effort, in
consultation with other agencies across
the U.S. Government, to fundamentally
overhaul the Federal personnel vetting
process. The effort was organized into
two phases. Phase One was designed to
reduce and eliminate the then extant
background investigation inventory,3
which had grown substantially due to a
confluence of prior events, while Phase
Two sought to establish a new
Government-wide approach to
personnel vetting. This general
statement of policy addresses Phase
Two of TW 2.0.
II. Discussion of the Policy
With the issuance of this General
Policy Statement, the Federal Personnel
Vetting Core Doctrine establishes the
philosophy of the Government’s
personnel vetting program and will
guide development of Government-wide
and agency policy. This Core Doctrine
defines the personnel vetting mission,
its guiding principles, key supporting
processes, and policy priorities.
After the issuance of this Federal
Personnel Vetting Core Doctrine, the
next steps involve consulting with
Federal agencies through interagency
processes to refine and begin issuing
and implementing the policies across
the Federal Government to bring about
change. In the coming months, ODNI
and OPM anticipate several Executive
Branch policies to be issued that will
provide high-level direction, establish
an aggressive path forward, and outline
immediate steps to bridge to the future
state. Public participation will be
provided through applicable statutory
procedures, such as notice-andcomment rulemaking under the
Administrative Procedure Act for
substantive rules, and 60-day and 30day notices under the Paperwork
Reduction Act for information
collections.
3 See https://www.performance.gov/CAP/action_
plans/july_2020_Security_Suitability.pdf. For the
first time since August 2014, the background
investigation case inventory has returned to a stable
state of approximately 200,000 cases, from a high
of 725,000 cases. The success of Phase One is the
result of concerted efforts, including policy changes
issued by ODNI and OPM as the Executive Agents
for personnel vetting, and internal process
improvements made by the National Background
Investigations Bureau (formerly a division of OPM),
and its successor, the Defense Counterintelligence
and Security Agency (DCSA).
E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM
13JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 13, 2021 / Notices
Federal Personnel Vetting Core Doctrine
RIN 3206–ZA02, October 2020
I. Overview
This Federal Personnel Vetting Core
Doctrine (Core Doctrine) sets forth the
defining elements of a successful
program for vetting the individuals who
make up a trusted Federal workforce. It
provides the philosophy for and guides
all personnel vetting policy, including
all Executive Branch-wide and agencyspecific policy and procedures. The
Executive Agents will review the Core
Doctrine regularly, at least every five
years, to ensure it is current and that
Federal personnel vetting business
operations at all times further the
principles, outcomes, and management
and policy priorities set forth herein.
Department and agency heads should
review their departmental and agency
policies and procedures periodically to
ensure those policies and procedures
further the principles, outcomes, and
management and policy priorities set
forth herein.
The contents of this document do not
have the force and effect of law and are
not meant to bind the public in any
way, except as authorized by law or
incorporated into a contract. This
document is intended only to provide
clarity to the public regarding existing
requirements under the law or agency
policies and guidance to Federal
agencies implementing the legal
requirements relating to Federal vetting
processes. The guidance is not intended
to revise or replace any previously
issued guidance.
II. Authorities
This Core Doctrine is issued by the
Security Executive Agent and the
Suitability & Credentialing Executive
Agents 4 pursuant to the following
authorities:
A. 50 U.S.C. 3341 and 3352a.
B. 5 U.S.C. 1103, 1104, 3301, 7301,
and 11001.
C. E.O. 12968, Access to Classified
Information (August 2, 1995), as
amended.
D. Homeland Security Presidential
Directive 12, Policy for a Common
Identification Standard for Federal
Employees and Contractors (August 27,
2004).
E. E.O. 13467, Reforming Processes
Related to Suitability for Government
Employment, Fitness for Contractor
Employees, and Eligibility for Access to
Classified National Security Information
(June 30, 2008), as amended.
4 Per Executive Order 13467, as amended, the
Director of OPM is the Suitability and Credentialing
Executive Agent and the Director of National
Intelligence is the Security Executive Agent.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Jan 12, 2021
Jkt 253001
F. E.O. 13488, Granting Reciprocity on
Excepted Service and Federal
Contractor Employee Fitness and
Reinvestigating Individuals in Positions
of Public Trust (January 16, 2009), as
amended.
G. Civil Service Rules II, V, and VI,
codified in 5 CFR parts 2, 5, and 6.
H. Office of Management and Budget
Circular No. A–123, Management’s
Responsibility for Enterprise Risk
Management and Internal Control.
III. Good Governance
Governance structures exist to
promote efficient and effective
personnel vetting outcomes and
facilitate accountability to the President;
responsiveness to Congress; and
transparency, to the extent possible,
consistent with the underlying mission,
to the workforce, the public, and other
stakeholders. Every member of the
trusted Federal workforce has a shared
responsibility for the successful
outcomes of the Federal personnel
vetting programs. The Federal personnel
vetting governance framework is set
forth in E.O. 13467, as amended, which
assigns the following entities key
governance roles and responsibilities:
A. The Security Executive Agent and
the Suitability & Credentialing
Executive Agent.
B. The Security, Suitability, and
Credentialing Performance
Accountability Council (PAC).
C. Department and agency heads.
D. Authorized personnel vetting
investigative service providers (ISP).
IV. Personnel Vetting Principles
The overarching principles applicable
to the Federal personnel vetting
enterprise are intended to reflect the
nation’s security and personnel
priorities. The following principles are
common to every aspect of personnel
vetting and are the benchmark for
successful personnel vetting operations:
A. Consistent, Cogent, and OutcomeBased Policy Hierarchy. Policy that is
informed by this Core Doctrine,
including specific guidelines that are
outcome-based, as appropriate, and
corresponding standards and
appendices that provide information
sources, methods, and implementation
guidance.
B. Holistic Risk Management for
Federal Personnel Vetting. Assessment
of potential threats and vulnerabilities
presented by those who are currently or
would be trusted insiders throughout
the Government to manage risk to
people, property, information, and
mission. Personnel vetting is one of
multiple areas where risk is managed in
the Government.
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2707
C. Government-Wide Solutions.
Providing Government-wide policy
mechanisms, information technology
shared services, shared services for
business functions, and Governmentwide regulatory tools whenever
possible.
D. Continuous Data-Driven
Improvements. Continuous performance
improvements that support data-driven
policy decisions, integration of
innovations and emerging technologies;
and remedial action and resolution for
when adverse events or other program
failures occur.
E. Lawful, Fair, and Effective
Outcomes. Consistent and equitable
treatment of individuals through
adherence to legal obligations and
protections, including privacy,
procedural, and constitutional rights, as
appropriate, promotes protection of
national security; protection of
Government personnel, property,
information and systems; and the
efficiency and integrity of the civil
service.
F. Open Government. Transparency of
the Federal personnel vetting program
to the Federal workforce, the public,
and Congress, consistent with
applicable privileges or statutory
limitations on disclosure (e.g., national
security needs, classified information
protection, controlled unclassified
information (CUI), and other privileges
such as the deliberative process
privilege).
G. Culture of Shared Responsibility. A
collective environment built upon
mutual goals, effective training,
appropriate behavior, and shared
expectations and obligations by all
stakeholders.
V. Personnel Vetting Outcomes
The Federal Government must
effectively optimize the resources,
information, and technology to support
the goal of a trusted workforce to
conduct the business of the Federal
Government. Personnel vetting assesses
the trustworthiness of individuals based
on the core characteristics to protect
people, property, information, and
mission, as they relate to the particular
purpose. Personnel vetting is successful
when it:
A. Provides a trusted workforce based
on an evaluation of conduct, integrity,
judgment, loyalty, and reliability.
B. Consistently results in efficient,
effective, and timely trust
determinations, regardless of vetting
domain, while complying with
applicable law.
C. Produces timely, comprehensive,
and appropriate organizational response
to adverse events.
E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM
13JAN1
2708
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 13, 2021 / Notices
D. Quickly identifies and
appropriately addresses issues that may
adversely affect the trust determinations
of individuals.
E. Promotes mobility of individuals
between and within Federal agencies
and Government contractors and
enables efficient re-entry to Federal
service from the private sector. Mobility
is enhanced by efficient transfer of trust
determinations and reciprocity between
departments and agencies, and across
roles for individuals who work for or on
behalf of the Federal Government.
F. Inspires the public’s confidence in
a trusted Federal workforce and the
wise stewardship of public resources.
G. Employs continuous data-driven
performance improvement and
outcome-based metrics.
H. Leverages research and innovation
capabilities to advance the Federal
personnel vetting mission and increase
the effectiveness of decision-making.
I. Uses data-driven analytics, as
appropriate, to improve decisionmaking regarding Federal policies,
processes, resources, personnel, and
programs.
VI. Policy Priorities
The success of the Government’s
personnel vetting program depends on
thoughtful, complete, and supportable
articulation of policy goals. Department
and agency personnel achieve policy
goals if they are clear and consistent.
For policy priorities to be successful:
A. All personnel vetting policy is
integrated and aligned within a unified
policy framework that is consistent with
applicable law. The personnel vetting
policy framework includes issuance of
guidelines, that describe the successful
outcomes that are intended, and those
outcomes are achieved through detailed
compliance criteria (issued in
‘‘standards’’).
B. Policy is reviewed regularly to
determine whether it remains consistent
with law, still aligns with mission
needs, is supported by current data, and
responds to societal or other relevant
changes, including emerging threats, to
achieve its intended purpose.
C. Policy guides process and
methodology and permits appropriate
flexibility in the choice of methodology
by agency practitioners charged with
implementing it.
D. Policy drives the integration of
business processes and capabilities for
efficient and effective management of
personnel vetting.
E. Policy promotes and enables multidirectional information-sharing to the
greatest extent practical among
personnel working in federal employee
and contractor vetting, human
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Jan 12, 2021
Jkt 253001
resources, insider threat, military
accessions, and complementary mission
areas to identify risks in a timely
manner, reduce waste, improve quality,
increase effectiveness, and maximize
efficiency.
F. Policy focuses on gathering and
sharing all relevant information about
an individual in a timely and efficient
manner to identify the extent to which
the individual exhibits the
characteristics of a person who can be
trusted to protect people, property,
information, and mission, as
appropriate under the relevant
adjudicative standards.
G. Policy clearly describes the
characteristics of a trusted person so
that criteria are applied consistently, to
the extent possible, across all vetting
domains, resulting in basic trust
determinations that are uniform across
all agencies, and allowing for additional
agency- or position-specific criteria to
be applied only when necessary to meet
unique needs of that agency or position.
H. Personnel vetting policy guidelines
informed by this Core Doctrine are
issued by the Executive Agents.
Authority to issue standards and their
appendices may be delegated by the
Executive Agents pursuant to their
respective authorities.
I. Departments and agencies must
ensure that their policy is consistent
with the Federal personnel vetting
policy framework.
J. Departments and agencies must
ensure sufficient funding and resources
are dedicated in support of the
personnel vetting mission.
VII. Risk Management
Risk is unavoidable when realizing an
organization’s objectives, and all
governmental activities involve
managing risk, including preventing,
detecting, and mitigating both human
and enterprise risk. Federal personnel
vetting is one of multiple ways that the
Government manages human risk;
others include insider threat programs,
human resources programs, drug testing,
etc. Personnel vetting risk management
is successful when:
A. It is applied both throughout the
end-to-end process and at all levels of
vetting to reduce risk to people,
property, information, and mission.
B. It uses a layered risk management
approach that (1) uses deterrence and
remediates vulnerabilities and (2) takes
into account enterprise risk
management and human risk
management in the development of
policy and in the design and operation
of government-wide and agency
personnel vetting programs that
implement the policy.
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
C. Personnel vetting integrates
information from entities with
complementary missions that also
manage personnel risk (e.g., insider
threat programs, counterintelligence,
human resources programs).
D. A senior agency official is assigned
with the responsibilities to oversee the
management of an effective personnel
vetting program.
VIII. Information Management
Obtaining and using information
about an individual to make a trust
determination, whether obtained from
internal agency or external Government
and non-government sources, must meet
the specific purpose as defined in the
personnel vetting program. When
gathering information departments and
agencies must take into account the
privacy and other legal rights of the
individual. Properly managing and
safeguarding information is essential to
good government, maintaining the trust
of the public and the workforce, and the
quality and effectiveness of operations.
For information management to be
successful, Federal departments and
agencies must ensure that:
A. Information used to make trust
determinations and manage risk is
accurate, relevant, timely, and as
complete as is reasonably necessary to
assure fairness to the individual.
B. Information collection is not
unduly intrusive and is appropriately
tailored to the purposes for which it is
collected.
C. Information collection and
management practices do not adversely
affect, and are designed to promote, the
Government’s ability to attract talented
and trustworthy individuals to public
service and service to Government
under contracts.
D. Vetting practitioners are engaged
with individuals during the entire
vetting process to collect information,
resolve derogatory information, improve
transparency, and cultivate effective
two-way communication between the
individual and the Government. Trusted
insiders and the Government share
responsibility for maintaining complete,
accurate, and relevant information as
part of an individual’s personnel
E. Vetting record.
F. A trained and vetted staff is
accountable for the protection of
information, including information
shared by complementary missions.
G. Mechanisms are in place to
safeguard personnel vetting sources and
methods, and to protect the collection,
use, dissemination, and retention of
information.
H. Efficiencies are maximized in the
collection, use, dissemination, and
E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM
13JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 13, 2021 / Notices
retention of information across
Government when there is cooperation
and timely sharing of relevant
information among complementary
missions both between and within
departments and agencies.
I. A risk-based approach is used to
identify and detect potential
vulnerabilities and threats early in the
process and undertake risk mitigation
throughout the process to lessen or
prevent the impact to people, property,
information, and mission.
IX. Information Technology
X. Awareness and Organizational
Culture
A Federal trusted workforce requires
that all levels of the Federal
Government use good risk management
techniques and promote an effective
security posture. A strong culture of
personal accountability and
understanding potential risks allows the
personnel vetting mission to effectively
function. To achieve this organizational
culture:
A. All members of the trusted
workforce must understand their role
and take personal ownership of their
responsibilities in the success of the
overall personnel vetting enterprise.
B. All members of the trusted
workforce must understand, support,
and execute the responsibilities that
18:08 Jan 12, 2021
Alexys Stanley,
Regulatory Affairs Analyst.
[FR Doc. 2021–00547 Filed 1–12–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–53–P
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory
Committee; Virtual Public Meeting
Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Successfully vetting a trusted
workforce and protecting personal data
requires effective, secure, and
innovative technology and the ability to
integrate newer and better technology as
it becomes available. Combating cyber
threats, complying with data protection
requirements, and managing
information are integral to the vetting
process. The successful execution of the
Federal personnel vetting mission
requires that Federal agencies ensure:
A. Security principles are embedded
in all information technology (IT)
systems in accordance with applicable
law, E.O.s, rules, and regulations.
B. Development efforts incorporate
government-wide guidance that adopts
private sector best practices for the agile
and iterative development and delivery
of new or modified IT systems and
capabilities.
C. Cutting-edge technologies are
adopted to improve both quality and
timeliness of personnel vetting, while
outdated and legacy IT capabilities are
decommissioned.
D. Federal IT shared services are used
to maximize return on investment,
reduce duplication, and improve
effectiveness.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
accompany a favorable trust
determination.
Jkt 253001
According to the provisions of
section 10 of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act, notice is hereby given
that a virtual meeting via teleconference
of the Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory
Committee will be held on Thursday,
February 18, 2021. There will be no inperson gathering for this meeting.
DATES: The virtual meeting will be held
on February 18, 2021, beginning at
10:00 a.m. (EST).
ADDRESSES: The meeting will convene
virtually.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ana
Paunoiu, 202–606–2858, or email payleave-policy@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory
Committee is composed of a Chair, five
representatives from labor unions
holding exclusive bargaining rights for
Federal prevailing rate employees, and
five representatives from Federal
agencies. Entitlement to membership on
the Committee is provided for in 5
U.S.C. 5347.
The Committee’s primary
responsibility is to review the Prevailing
Rate System and other matters pertinent
to establishing prevailing rates under
subchapter IV, chapter 53, 5 U.S.C., as
amended, and from time to time advise
the Office of Personnel Management.
Annually, the Chair compiles a report
of pay issues discussed and concluded
recommendations. These reports are
available to the public. Reports for
calendar years 2008 to 2019 are posted
at https://www.opm.gov/fprac. Previous
reports are also available, upon written
request to the Committee.
The public is invited to submit
material in writing to the Chair on
Federal Wage System pay matters felt to
be deserving of the Committee’s
attention. Additional information on
these meetings may be obtained by
contacting the Committee at Office of
Personnel Management, Federal
Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2709
Room 7H31, 1900 E Street NW,
Washington, DC 20415, (202) 606–2858.
This meeting is open to the public,
with an audio option for listening. This
notice sets forth the agenda for the
meeting and the participation
guidelines.
Meeting Agenda. The tentative agenda
for this meeting includes the following
Federal Wage System items:
• The definition of Monroe County, PA
• The definition of San Joaquin County,
CA
• The definition of the SalinasMonterey, CA, wage area
• The definition of the Puerto Rico
wage area
• Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee
Annual Summary for 2020
Public Participation: The February 18,
2021, meeting of the Federal Prevailing
Rate Advisory Committee is open to the
public through advance registration.
Public participation is available for the
teleconference by audio access only. All
individuals who plan to attend the
virtual public meeting to listen must
register by sending an email to payleave-policy@opm.gov with the subject
line ‘‘February 18 FPRAC Meeting’’ no
later than Tuesday, February 16, 2021.
The following information must be
provided when registering:
• Name.
• Agency and duty station.
• Email address.
• Your topic of interest.
Members of the press, in addition to
registering for this event, must also
RSVP to media@opm.gov by February
16, 2021.
A confirmation email will be sent
upon receipt of the registration. Audio
teleconference information for
participation will be sent to registrants
the morning of the virtual meeting.
Office of Personnel Management.
Alexys Stanley,
Regulatory Affairs Analyst.
[FR Doc. 2021–00466 Filed 1–12–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
POSTAL SERVICE
Privacy Act; System of Records
Postal ServiceTM.
Notice of new system of records.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The United States Postal
ServiceTM (USPSTM) is proposing to
create a new Customer Privacy Act
System of Records (SOR) to support the
implementation of enhanced scanning
functionality at the USPS Mail Recovery
Center (MRC) in order to improve the
customer experience. The new SOR will
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM
13JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 8 (Wednesday, January 13, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2705-2709]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-00547]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
Federal Personnel Vetting Core Doctrine
AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and Office of the Director
of National Intelligence (ODNI).
ACTION: General statement of policy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action by the Acting OPM Director in the capacity as the
Suitability and Credentialing Executive Agent, in consultation with the
Director of National Intelligence (DNI) in the capacity as the Security
Executive Agent, establishes a Federal Personnel Vetting Core Doctrine
to guide transformative efforts to reform the U.S. Government personnel
security vetting processes. This policy statement is consistent with
direction established by the President in an Executive order entitled
Reforming Processes Related to Suitability for Government Employment,
Fitness for Contractor Employees, and Eligibility for Access to
Classified National Security Information, mandating the Executive
Agents to align, to the greatest extent practicable, the Federal
workforce vetting processes to promote mobility, improve efficiencies
and move towards an enhanced risk management approach. With the
issuance of this general statement of policy, the Federal Personnel
Vetting Core Doctrine establishes the philosophy for the Government's
personnel vetting program and will guide development of Government-wide
and agency policy. This Core Doctrine defines the personnel vetting
mission, its guiding principles, key supporting processes, and policy
priorities.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 12, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the docket number or
Regulation Identifier Number (Z-RIN) for this document, by any of the
following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for sending comments.
All submissions received must include the agency name and docket
number or RIN (RIN 3206-ZA02, October 2020) for this document. The
general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the
public is to make these submissions available for public viewing at
https://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change,
including any personal identifiers or contact information. OPM will
prepare and post a public response to major concerns raised in the
comments, as appropriate, on its guidance Web portal, either before or
when the guidance document is finalized and issued.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dorianna Rice at Suitability Executive
Agent Programs, OPM, [email protected] or (202) 606-8460 and/or National
Counterintelligence and Security Center, ODNI, at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority for This Action
Executive Order 13467, Reforming Processes Related to Suitability
for Government Employment, Fitness for Contractor Employees, and
Eligibility for Access to Classified National Security Information
(June 30, 2008), as amended, established the DNI as the Security
Executive Agent and the Director of OPM as the Suitability &
Credentialing Executive Agent.\1\ ODNI and OPM are the primary entities
responsible for policy and oversight of the Federal Government's
personnel vetting process. The ODNI and OPM are issuing this general
statement of policy to inform Federal agencies and the public of a new
framework designed to guide the fundamental transformation of the
Federal Government's personnel vetting process. All other applicable
authorities are cited within the body of the general statement of
policy below. 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(1)(D) provides that agencies publish
their general
[[Page 2706]]
statements of policy in the Federal Register for the guidance of the
public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Previously, OPM was already responsible for issuing the
standards by which candidates for the competitive and senior
executive service were to be assessed for entry into the civil
service, pursuant to the President's statutory authority to
establish the criteria for entry into the competitive service, and
his delegation of that authority to OPM through the Civil Service
Rules. 5 U.S.C. 3301, 3302; E.O. 10577, Civil Service Rules II, and
V, codified at 5 CFR parts 2 and 5, as amended. Under President
Clinton's E.O. 12968 (Aug. 2, 1995), the Security Policy Board and
successor Policy Coordinating Committee were responsible for
recommending standards to the President by which eligibility for
access to classified information was to be determined. With
President George W. Bush's promulgation of E.O. 13467, the Director
of National Intelligence assumed that function. E.O. 13467, and
subsequent Executive Orders, have also made OPM responsible for
issuing standards related to for eligibility for logical or physical
access to Government systems and facilities; fitness for performing
work on behalf of the Government under a contract; and fitness for
appointment to the excepted service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The contents of this document do not have the force and effect of
law and are not meant to bind the public in any way, except as
authorized by law or incorporated into a contract. This document is
intended to provide clarity to the public regarding existing
requirements under the law or agency policies and to inform agencies of
the framework that will guide their implementation of existing legal
requirements, and any new requirements that are adopted. This document
was created to explain to agencies the underlying philosophies that
should animate the implementation of their responsibilities with
respect to adjudicating suitability or fitness, eligibility to hold a
position that is national security sensitive, and eligibility for
logical or physical access to agency systems or facilities.
Regulatory Impact
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This guidance has been reviewed by OMB and designated a
``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
However, it is not economically significant.
Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation
As required by Executive Orders 13891 and 13609, OPM and ODNI have
concluded that this guidance document is not a significant regulation
having significant international impacts.
Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs
This guidance is not expected to be subject to the requirements of
E.O. 13771(82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017) because it is expected to
impose no more than de minimis costs.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
OPM and ODNI certify that this guidance document will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
because it will apply only to Federal agencies.
Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995
This guidance will not result in the expenditure by state, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100 million or more in any year and it will not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed
necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995.
Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) requires rules
(as defined in 5 U.S.C. 804) to be submitted to Congress before taking
effect. OPM will submit to Congress and the Comptroller General of the
United States a report regarding the issuance of this action before its
effective date, as required by 5 U.S.C. 801. This action is not major
as defined by the Congressional Review Act (CRA) (5 U.S.C. 804).
Paperwork Reduction Act
This guidance does not impose any new reporting or record-keeping
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
I. Background: Trusted Workforce 2.0
Effective Government operations require that the Federal
Government's workforce be trusted to deliver on the mission, provide
excellent service, and demonstrate effective stewardship of taxpayer
funds. Recognizing that establishing and maintaining trust \2\ is the
core goal of the Federal personnel vetting program, the Security
Executive Agent and the Suitability and Credentialing Executive Agent
in coordination and consultation with the Under Secretary of Defense
for Intelligence and Security (USD(I&S)) and the Deputy Director for
Management of OMB, in their roles as Principal Members of the Security,
Suitability and Credentialing Performance Accountability Council (PAC),
have initiated the ``Trusted Workforce 2.0'' (TW 2.0) transformational
efforts to provide a roadmap for reformed and innovative Federal
personnel vetting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The nature of the trust determination depends on the legal
requirements for each vetting program. Thus for suitability and
fitness determinations the trust consideration is to ensure that
admission into the Civil Service will ``best promote the efficiency
of that service,'' by ascertaining ``the fitness of applicants . . .
as to character . . . for the employment sought'' (5 U.S.C. 3301);
for national security eligibility the trust consideration is to
ensure that eligibility is ``clearly consistent with the national
security interests of the United States,'' where adjudication of
past conduct ``is only an attempt to predict . . . possible future
behavior'' and ``does not equate with passing judgment upon the
individual's character.'' (E.O. 12968, sec. 3.1; Dep't of the Navy
v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 528 (1988)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In March 2018, ODNI and OPM launched the TW 2.0 effort, in
consultation with other agencies across the U.S. Government, to
fundamentally overhaul the Federal personnel vetting process. The
effort was organized into two phases. Phase One was designed to reduce
and eliminate the then extant background investigation inventory,\3\
which had grown substantially due to a confluence of prior events,
while Phase Two sought to establish a new Government-wide approach to
personnel vetting. This general statement of policy addresses Phase Two
of TW 2.0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See https://www.performance.gov/CAP/action_plans/july_2020_Security_Suitability.pdf. For the first time since August
2014, the background investigation case inventory has returned to a
stable state of approximately 200,000 cases, from a high of 725,000
cases. The success of Phase One is the result of concerted efforts,
including policy changes issued by ODNI and OPM as the Executive
Agents for personnel vetting, and internal process improvements made
by the National Background Investigations Bureau (formerly a
division of OPM), and its successor, the Defense Counterintelligence
and Security Agency (DCSA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Discussion of the Policy
With the issuance of this General Policy Statement, the Federal
Personnel Vetting Core Doctrine establishes the philosophy of the
Government's personnel vetting program and will guide development of
Government-wide and agency policy. This Core Doctrine defines the
personnel vetting mission, its guiding principles, key supporting
processes, and policy priorities.
After the issuance of this Federal Personnel Vetting Core Doctrine,
the next steps involve consulting with Federal agencies through
interagency processes to refine and begin issuing and implementing the
policies across the Federal Government to bring about change. In the
coming months, ODNI and OPM anticipate several Executive Branch
policies to be issued that will provide high-level direction, establish
an aggressive path forward, and outline immediate steps to bridge to
the future state. Public participation will be provided through
applicable statutory procedures, such as notice-and-comment rulemaking
under the Administrative Procedure Act for substantive rules, and 60-
day and 30-day notices under the Paperwork Reduction Act for
information collections.
[[Page 2707]]
Federal Personnel Vetting Core Doctrine
RIN 3206-ZA02, October 2020
I. Overview
This Federal Personnel Vetting Core Doctrine (Core Doctrine) sets
forth the defining elements of a successful program for vetting the
individuals who make up a trusted Federal workforce. It provides the
philosophy for and guides all personnel vetting policy, including all
Executive Branch-wide and agency-specific policy and procedures. The
Executive Agents will review the Core Doctrine regularly, at least
every five years, to ensure it is current and that Federal personnel
vetting business operations at all times further the principles,
outcomes, and management and policy priorities set forth herein.
Department and agency heads should review their departmental and agency
policies and procedures periodically to ensure those policies and
procedures further the principles, outcomes, and management and policy
priorities set forth herein.
The contents of this document do not have the force and effect of
law and are not meant to bind the public in any way, except as
authorized by law or incorporated into a contract. This document is
intended only to provide clarity to the public regarding existing
requirements under the law or agency policies and guidance to Federal
agencies implementing the legal requirements relating to Federal
vetting processes. The guidance is not intended to revise or replace
any previously issued guidance.
II. Authorities
This Core Doctrine is issued by the Security Executive Agent and
the Suitability & Credentialing Executive Agents \4\ pursuant to the
following authorities:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Per Executive Order 13467, as amended, the Director of OPM
is the Suitability and Credentialing Executive Agent and the
Director of National Intelligence is the Security Executive Agent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. 50 U.S.C. 3341 and 3352a.
B. 5 U.S.C. 1103, 1104, 3301, 7301, and 11001.
C. E.O. 12968, Access to Classified Information (August 2, 1995),
as amended.
D. Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12, Policy for a Common
Identification Standard for Federal Employees and Contractors (August
27, 2004).
E. E.O. 13467, Reforming Processes Related to Suitability for
Government Employment, Fitness for Contractor Employees, and
Eligibility for Access to Classified National Security Information
(June 30, 2008), as amended.
F. E.O. 13488, Granting Reciprocity on Excepted Service and Federal
Contractor Employee Fitness and Reinvestigating Individuals in
Positions of Public Trust (January 16, 2009), as amended.
G. Civil Service Rules II, V, and VI, codified in 5 CFR parts 2, 5,
and 6.
H. Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-123, Management's
Responsibility for Enterprise Risk Management and Internal Control.
III. Good Governance
Governance structures exist to promote efficient and effective
personnel vetting outcomes and facilitate accountability to the
President; responsiveness to Congress; and transparency, to the extent
possible, consistent with the underlying mission, to the workforce, the
public, and other stakeholders. Every member of the trusted Federal
workforce has a shared responsibility for the successful outcomes of
the Federal personnel vetting programs. The Federal personnel vetting
governance framework is set forth in E.O. 13467, as amended, which
assigns the following entities key governance roles and
responsibilities:
A. The Security Executive Agent and the Suitability & Credentialing
Executive Agent.
B. The Security, Suitability, and Credentialing Performance
Accountability Council (PAC).
C. Department and agency heads.
D. Authorized personnel vetting investigative service providers
(ISP).
IV. Personnel Vetting Principles
The overarching principles applicable to the Federal personnel
vetting enterprise are intended to reflect the nation's security and
personnel priorities. The following principles are common to every
aspect of personnel vetting and are the benchmark for successful
personnel vetting operations:
A. Consistent, Cogent, and Outcome-Based Policy Hierarchy. Policy
that is informed by this Core Doctrine, including specific guidelines
that are outcome-based, as appropriate, and corresponding standards and
appendices that provide information sources, methods, and
implementation guidance.
B. Holistic Risk Management for Federal Personnel Vetting.
Assessment of potential threats and vulnerabilities presented by those
who are currently or would be trusted insiders throughout the
Government to manage risk to people, property, information, and
mission. Personnel vetting is one of multiple areas where risk is
managed in the Government.
C. Government-Wide Solutions. Providing Government-wide policy
mechanisms, information technology shared services, shared services for
business functions, and Government-wide regulatory tools whenever
possible.
D. Continuous Data-Driven Improvements. Continuous performance
improvements that support data-driven policy decisions, integration of
innovations and emerging technologies; and remedial action and
resolution for when adverse events or other program failures occur.
E. Lawful, Fair, and Effective Outcomes. Consistent and equitable
treatment of individuals through adherence to legal obligations and
protections, including privacy, procedural, and constitutional rights,
as appropriate, promotes protection of national security; protection of
Government personnel, property, information and systems; and the
efficiency and integrity of the civil service.
F. Open Government. Transparency of the Federal personnel vetting
program to the Federal workforce, the public, and Congress, consistent
with applicable privileges or statutory limitations on disclosure
(e.g., national security needs, classified information protection,
controlled unclassified information (CUI), and other privileges such as
the deliberative process privilege).
G. Culture of Shared Responsibility. A collective environment built
upon mutual goals, effective training, appropriate behavior, and shared
expectations and obligations by all stakeholders.
V. Personnel Vetting Outcomes
The Federal Government must effectively optimize the resources,
information, and technology to support the goal of a trusted workforce
to conduct the business of the Federal Government. Personnel vetting
assesses the trustworthiness of individuals based on the core
characteristics to protect people, property, information, and mission,
as they relate to the particular purpose. Personnel vetting is
successful when it:
A. Provides a trusted workforce based on an evaluation of conduct,
integrity, judgment, loyalty, and reliability.
B. Consistently results in efficient, effective, and timely trust
determinations, regardless of vetting domain, while complying with
applicable law.
C. Produces timely, comprehensive, and appropriate organizational
response to adverse events.
[[Page 2708]]
D. Quickly identifies and appropriately addresses issues that may
adversely affect the trust determinations of individuals.
E. Promotes mobility of individuals between and within Federal
agencies and Government contractors and enables efficient re-entry to
Federal service from the private sector. Mobility is enhanced by
efficient transfer of trust determinations and reciprocity between
departments and agencies, and across roles for individuals who work for
or on behalf of the Federal Government.
F. Inspires the public's confidence in a trusted Federal workforce
and the wise stewardship of public resources.
G. Employs continuous data-driven performance improvement and
outcome-based metrics.
H. Leverages research and innovation capabilities to advance the
Federal personnel vetting mission and increase the effectiveness of
decision-making.
I. Uses data-driven analytics, as appropriate, to improve decision-
making regarding Federal policies, processes, resources, personnel, and
programs.
VI. Policy Priorities
The success of the Government's personnel vetting program depends
on thoughtful, complete, and supportable articulation of policy goals.
Department and agency personnel achieve policy goals if they are clear
and consistent. For policy priorities to be successful:
A. All personnel vetting policy is integrated and aligned within a
unified policy framework that is consistent with applicable law. The
personnel vetting policy framework includes issuance of guidelines,
that describe the successful outcomes that are intended, and those
outcomes are achieved through detailed compliance criteria (issued in
``standards'').
B. Policy is reviewed regularly to determine whether it remains
consistent with law, still aligns with mission needs, is supported by
current data, and responds to societal or other relevant changes,
including emerging threats, to achieve its intended purpose.
C. Policy guides process and methodology and permits appropriate
flexibility in the choice of methodology by agency practitioners
charged with implementing it.
D. Policy drives the integration of business processes and
capabilities for efficient and effective management of personnel
vetting.
E. Policy promotes and enables multi-directional information-
sharing to the greatest extent practical among personnel working in
federal employee and contractor vetting, human resources, insider
threat, military accessions, and complementary mission areas to
identify risks in a timely manner, reduce waste, improve quality,
increase effectiveness, and maximize efficiency.
F. Policy focuses on gathering and sharing all relevant information
about an individual in a timely and efficient manner to identify the
extent to which the individual exhibits the characteristics of a person
who can be trusted to protect people, property, information, and
mission, as appropriate under the relevant adjudicative standards.
G. Policy clearly describes the characteristics of a trusted person
so that criteria are applied consistently, to the extent possible,
across all vetting domains, resulting in basic trust determinations
that are uniform across all agencies, and allowing for additional
agency- or position-specific criteria to be applied only when necessary
to meet unique needs of that agency or position.
H. Personnel vetting policy guidelines informed by this Core
Doctrine are issued by the Executive Agents. Authority to issue
standards and their appendices may be delegated by the Executive Agents
pursuant to their respective authorities.
I. Departments and agencies must ensure that their policy is
consistent with the Federal personnel vetting policy framework.
J. Departments and agencies must ensure sufficient funding and
resources are dedicated in support of the personnel vetting mission.
VII. Risk Management
Risk is unavoidable when realizing an organization's objectives,
and all governmental activities involve managing risk, including
preventing, detecting, and mitigating both human and enterprise risk.
Federal personnel vetting is one of multiple ways that the Government
manages human risk; others include insider threat programs, human
resources programs, drug testing, etc. Personnel vetting risk
management is successful when:
A. It is applied both throughout the end-to-end process and at all
levels of vetting to reduce risk to people, property, information, and
mission.
B. It uses a layered risk management approach that (1) uses
deterrence and remediates vulnerabilities and (2) takes into account
enterprise risk management and human risk management in the development
of policy and in the design and operation of government-wide and agency
personnel vetting programs that implement the policy.
C. Personnel vetting integrates information from entities with
complementary missions that also manage personnel risk (e.g., insider
threat programs, counterintelligence, human resources programs).
D. A senior agency official is assigned with the responsibilities
to oversee the management of an effective personnel vetting program.
VIII. Information Management
Obtaining and using information about an individual to make a trust
determination, whether obtained from internal agency or external
Government and non-government sources, must meet the specific purpose
as defined in the personnel vetting program. When gathering information
departments and agencies must take into account the privacy and other
legal rights of the individual. Properly managing and safeguarding
information is essential to good government, maintaining the trust of
the public and the workforce, and the quality and effectiveness of
operations. For information management to be successful, Federal
departments and agencies must ensure that:
A. Information used to make trust determinations and manage risk is
accurate, relevant, timely, and as complete as is reasonably necessary
to assure fairness to the individual.
B. Information collection is not unduly intrusive and is
appropriately tailored to the purposes for which it is collected.
C. Information collection and management practices do not adversely
affect, and are designed to promote, the Government's ability to
attract talented and trustworthy individuals to public service and
service to Government under contracts.
D. Vetting practitioners are engaged with individuals during the
entire vetting process to collect information, resolve derogatory
information, improve transparency, and cultivate effective two-way
communication between the individual and the Government. Trusted
insiders and the Government share responsibility for maintaining
complete, accurate, and relevant information as part of an individual's
personnel
E. Vetting record.
F. A trained and vetted staff is accountable for the protection of
information, including information shared by complementary missions.
G. Mechanisms are in place to safeguard personnel vetting sources
and methods, and to protect the collection, use, dissemination, and
retention of information.
H. Efficiencies are maximized in the collection, use,
dissemination, and
[[Page 2709]]
retention of information across Government when there is cooperation
and timely sharing of relevant information among complementary missions
both between and within departments and agencies.
I. A risk-based approach is used to identify and detect potential
vulnerabilities and threats early in the process and undertake risk
mitigation throughout the process to lessen or prevent the impact to
people, property, information, and mission.
IX. Information Technology
Successfully vetting a trusted workforce and protecting personal
data requires effective, secure, and innovative technology and the
ability to integrate newer and better technology as it becomes
available. Combating cyber threats, complying with data protection
requirements, and managing information are integral to the vetting
process. The successful execution of the Federal personnel vetting
mission requires that Federal agencies ensure:
A. Security principles are embedded in all information technology
(IT) systems in accordance with applicable law, E.O.s, rules, and
regulations.
B. Development efforts incorporate government-wide guidance that
adopts private sector best practices for the agile and iterative
development and delivery of new or modified IT systems and
capabilities.
C. Cutting-edge technologies are adopted to improve both quality
and timeliness of personnel vetting, while outdated and legacy IT
capabilities are decommissioned.
D. Federal IT shared services are used to maximize return on
investment, reduce duplication, and improve effectiveness.
X. Awareness and Organizational Culture
A Federal trusted workforce requires that all levels of the Federal
Government use good risk management techniques and promote an effective
security posture. A strong culture of personal accountability and
understanding potential risks allows the personnel vetting mission to
effectively function. To achieve this organizational culture:
A. All members of the trusted workforce must understand their role
and take personal ownership of their responsibilities in the success of
the overall personnel vetting enterprise.
B. All members of the trusted workforce must understand, support,
and execute the responsibilities that accompany a favorable trust
determination.
Alexys Stanley,
Regulatory Affairs Analyst.
[FR Doc. 2021-00547 Filed 1-12-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-53-P