FR 2025-00773

General Summary

The document in question represents a set of technical amendments issued by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to certain aviation security regulations. The primary focus of these amendments is on the rules governing the recordkeeping requirements for Criminal History Record Checks (CHRCs) conducted by airport and aircraft operators. The amendments clarify that operators are only required to retain the current CHRC records, including their certifications or authorizations, and not any historical CHRC records. Furthermore, these records may be stored either in paper or electronic format, providing flexibility and reducing the administrative burden.

Significant Issues and Concerns

A key feature of the document is its legal and technical jargon, which may be challenging for a general audience to fully grasp. There are references to specific U.S. Code sections and legal terms, such as "5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)" and "procedural rule," which assume a level of familiarity with administrative law that many readers may not possess. Moreover, frequent references to historical regulatory dates and processes—like rules and amendments dated December 6, 2001—could be confusing without a clear timeline or context provided within the document.

The document also mentions numerous federal acts and executive orders, such as the Paperwork Reduction Act and Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, without detailed explanations. This might lead to misunderstandings about how these laws and orders relate to the TSA's requirements and what implications they hold.

Public Impact

For the general public, these amendments might remain largely unseen but are nonetheless crucial for maintaining aviation security. By streamlining the recordkeeping requirements, the TSA aims to reduce the bureaucratic load on airport and aircraft operators. This, in turn, can enhance operational efficiency and potentially reduce security-related costs, ensuring resources are used where they are most impactful.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

Airport and aircraft operators are directly affected by these amendments. The move to require retention of only current CHRC records will likely alleviate some of the administrative burdens and associated costs incurred by retaining vast archives of historical records. This measure could positively impact these stakeholders by reducing storage needs and simplifying compliance requirements, allowing them to allocate resources more effectively.

Conversely, the individuals whose CHRC records are maintained might have concerns about privacy and data protection, even though the document assures confidentiality of records. The shift towards electronic records could also raise questions around cybersecurity and the safeguarding of sensitive personal information.

In a broader sense, those in the aviation and security sectors might view these regulatory changes as a reflection of evolving security needs and risk management strategies, post-September 11, 2001. It is crucial for all stakeholders to stay informed and comply with the updated regulations to ensure continued safety and security within the airline industry.

The document primarily deals with amendments to the recordkeeping requirements for criminal history record checks (CHRC) within the aviation security context. One relevant financial aspect is the potential cost savings resulting from modifying how these records are retained, analyzed under various regulatory frameworks. However, the primary explicit financial reference is found in relation to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The document mentions that under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), each federal agency must prepare a statement assessing the effects of any federal mandate. This includes rules that might lead to expenditures of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year by state, local, and tribal governments, or by the private sector. The context here ensures readers understand the substantial nature of such financial thresholds when evaluating or proposing rules with significant financial implications.

Financial Implications

The document implies that the amendments to the criminal history record checks are not expected to impose such significant financial burdens. In fact, these amendments may lead to cost savings by reducing the amount of old records that need to be maintained and by enabling electronic storage, which can lower costs compared to traditional paper records. This lack of a $100 million impact means that the rule does not trigger the need for the detailed financial analyses that UMRA would require for larger expenditures.

Issues and Financial Clarity

One issue in the document is the complexity of legal references, which can obscure the understanding of financial implications. References to statutes, such as those in the UMRA section, require understanding of budget thresholds and financial mandates tied to rulemaking. There's also the issue of understanding what constitutes "current CHRC" records, which directly impacts how expenditures for storage and compliance might be evaluated. Clarifying these points would assist stakeholders, particularly smaller entities, in assessing the cost-effectiveness of compliance with the amended regulations.

By focusing on technical amendments intended to streamline and simplify record retention, coupled with potential cost reductions through modernized storage methods, the document indicates a direction towards cost mitigation in compliance practices. However, explicit financial allocations or spending within this rule are minimal or implied rather than directly addressed. The document thus emphasizes procedural efficiency over direct financial outlays or appropriations.