This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

12269 

Vol. 76, No. 44 

Monday, March 7, 2011 

1The Emergency Supplemental Appropriations 

Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and 

Tsunami Relief, 2005, Public Law 109–13, 119 Stat. 

231, 302 (May 11, 2005) (codified at 49 U.S.C. 

30301 note). 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Office of the Secretary 

6 CFR Part 37 

[Docket No. DHS–2006–0030] 

RIN 1601–AA63 

Minimum Standards for Driver’s 

Licenses and Identification Cards 

Acceptable by Federal Agencies for 

Official Purposes 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule; full compliance date. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Department of 

Homeland Security’s REAL ID 

regulations, States must be in full 

compliance with the REAL ID Act of 

2005 by May 11, 2011. This final rule 

changes that date to January 15, 2013. 

This change will give States the time 

necessary to ensure that driver’s 

licenses and identification cards issued 

by States meet the security requirements 

of the REAL ID Act. 

DATES: Effective on March 7, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steve Kozar, Office of State-Issued 

Identification Support, Screening 

Coordination Office, Department of 

Homeland Security, Washington, DC 

20528 (202) 447–3368. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The REAL ID Act of 2005 (the Act) 1

prohibits Federal agencies, effective 

May 11, 2008, from accepting a driver’s 

license or personal identification card 

issued by a U.S. State for any official 

purpose unless the license or card has 

been issued by a State that meets the 

requirements set forth in the Act. 

Section 205(b) of the Act authorizes the 

Secretary of Homeland Security to grant 

States extensions of time to meet the 

requirements of the Act if the State 

provides adequate justification for 

noncompliance. 

On January 29, 2008, DHS 

promulgated a final rule implementing 

the requirements of the Act. See 73 FR 

5272, also 6 CFR part 37. The final rule 

extended the full compliance date from 

May 11, 2008 to May 11, 2011. See 6 

CFR 37.51(a). To be in full compliance 

with the Act, States must meet the 

standards of 6 CFR Part 37, Subparts A 

through D, or have a REAL ID program 

that DHS has determined to be 

comparable to the standards of Subparts 

A through D. Id. States must be fully 

compliant on or before May 11, 2011. Id. 

At the time DHS promulgated the 

REAL ID final rule, DHS recognized that 

many States were having trouble 

meeting the statutory requirements of 

the Act. In an attempt to balance DHS’s 

responsibility to ensure that driver’s 

licenses and identification cards 

intended to be used for official Federal 

purposes met certain statutory and 

regulatory requirements with the 

operational needs of the States, DHS 

bifurcated the requirements for 

compliance with the Act. See 75 FR 

5272 at 5399. DHS required States to 

demonstrate material compliance with 

certain elements of the regulation by 

January 1, 2010, and to be fully 

compliant with subparts A through D of 

the regulation on or before May 11, 

2011. See 6 CFR 37.51(a) and (b). 

As the REAL ID program has 

developed further, States have 

continued to experience trouble meeting 

the statutory requirements of the Act. As 

a result of these difficulties, in 

December 2009, DHS stayed until 

further notice the date by which states 

are required to demonstrate material 

compliance. See 74 FR 68477. 

II. Change of the Full Compliance Date 

From May 11, 2011 to January 15, 2013 

Since promulgation of the REAL ID 

final rule, DHS has worked very closely 

with the States to assist with 

implementation and has awarded large 

amounts of grant funds. These efforts 

have assisted States in making 

significant progress toward meeting 

most of the REAL ID requirements. 

Since 2008, DHS has awarded States 

150 separate grants that collectively 

total approximately $175,000,000. 

Of the grant money expended by the 

States, the majority has been spent on 

the following items: 

(1) Facility infrastructure upgrades, 

including security cameras at DMV 

locations, modification of facilities to 

limit public access to sensitive 

equipment and card production 

materials storage locations, and the 

addition of or upgrades to security 

alarms, doors, or other electronic 

detection equipment; 

(2) Upgrades of IT infrastructure or 

systems overhaul (including 

modernization of IT systems to ensure 

all in-State DMVs are interoperable), 

software upgrades to improve the ability 

to protect personal identity information, 

upgrades of network communication, 

and ensuring the ability to use the DHS 

Systematic Alien Verification for 

Entitlements System (SAVE), DHS’s 

electronic immigration verification 

system; 

(3) Document security enhancement, 

including the development of more 

tamper-resistant documents with 

enhanced security features, and the use 

of facial recognition software to detect a 

person with multiple identity 

documents or social security numbers; 

(4) Equipment upgrades, including 

document scanners, high-resolution 

digital scanners, and high-speed 

printers; and 

(5) Reengineering of business 

practices, including converting from an 

over-the-counter issuance to a more 

secure central issuance process, 

minimizing the potential for insider 

fraud. 

These enhancements have allowed 

States to make significant progress 

toward achieving compliance with 

many parts of the REAL ID regulation, 

including several provisions of Subpart 

B (minimum documentation, 

verification, and card issuance 

requirements), Subpart C (source 

document retention and DMV 

databases), and Subpart D (security at 

DMVs and driver’s license and 

identification card production 

facilities). There are, however, still 

significant portions of the regulation, 

mostly involving document verification 

and markings, that most States will be 

unable to meet by May 11, 2011. 

The inability of States to fully comply 

with the requirements of REAL ID by 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

12270 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

May 11, 2011 is the result of a number 

of factors, including diminished State 

budgets caused by the economic 

downturn and the uncertainty 

throughout much of the 111th Congress 

about Congressional action on the PASS 

ID Act, which would have modified 

some of the requirements of REAL ID. 

Implementation of REAL ID involves a 

significant financial investment, and, 

despite the receipt of substantial Federal 

grant funds, a number of States are 

struggling to come up with the resources 

necessary to meet the full compliance 

deadline in these times of budget 

austerity. Additionally, some States 

delayed investing in new technology 

and process changes because of 

uncertainty associated with 

Congressional action on the PASS ID 

Act. PASS ID, which was supported by 

the Administration as well as State 

associations, including the National 

Governor’s Association and the 

American Association of Motor Vehicle 

Administrators, would have modified 

certain requirements of REAL ID to 

facilitate State compliance. States 

delayed making investments to 

implement REAL ID to ensure they were 

not making expenditures to comply 

with requirements that would have been 

undone had PASS ID been enacted into 

law. Now that PASS ID seems unlikely 

to be enacted, DHS anticipates States 

will refocus on achieving compliance 

with the REAL ID requirements. 

As a result of these factors, and 

because of the significant progress many 

States are making towards achieving full 

compliance, DHS believes that a change 

of the full compliance deadline from 

May 11, 2011 to January 15, 2013 is 

warranted. This change will give States 

more time to ensure that the documents 

they issue meet the security 

requirements of the REAL ID Act. 

Without this change, as of the full 

compliance date, licenses and 

identification cards issued by States will 

not be accepted for official purposes. 

‘‘Official purpose’’ as defined in both the 

Act and the regulation includes, but is 

not limited to, accessing Federal 

facilities and boarding Federally 

regulated commercial aircraft. 

Individuals possessing licenses and 

identification documents issued by noncompliant States would either have to 

undergo additional screening or provide 

alternative documents to pass through 

security at airports and to access Federal 

facilities. DHS estimates that over 90 

percent of the documents shown for 

identity purposes for boarding Federally 

regulated commercial aircraft and for 

accessing Federal facilities are driver’s 

licenses or other State-issued identity 

documents. Requiring individuals to 

obtain alternative or additional identity 

documents or to undergo additional 

screening would result in significant 

disruptions to commercial airline travel 

and to the ability of the public to 

conduct business with the Federal 

government. 

III. Regulatory Analyses 

A. Administrative Procedure Act 

The Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) provides that an agency may 

dispense with notice and comment 

rulemaking procedures when an agency, 

for ‘‘good cause,’’ finds that those 

procedures are ‘‘impracticable, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest.’’ See 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). 

As discussed above, throughout the 

development and implementation of the 

REAL ID program, DHS has engaged in 

extensive, ongoing discussions with the 

States regarding their ability to comply 

with the REAL ID Act and the DHS 

regulations. Based on those 

communications, DHS has learned that 

the States, despite their good-faith 

efforts, will not be able to meet the May 

11, 2011 deadline. If States are unable 

to meet the May 11, 2011 full 

compliance deadline, and the deadline 

is not changed, as of that date, Federal 

agencies, including the Transportation 

Security Administration (TSA), cannot 

accept State-issued driver’s licenses or 

identification cards for use in boarding 

commercial aircraft. This would 

severely disrupt commercial aviation, as 

travelers would either have to obtain 

and use alternative TSA approved 

documents or submit to additional 

screening to pass through security at 

airports. Thus, it would be contrary to 

the public interest to inflict a significant 

and substantial burden on the traveling 

public and the travel industry. 

Furthermore, to seek public comment 

prior to changing the full compliance 

date would be impracticable, given that 

such comments could not be received 

and acted upon prior to the full 

compliance date. 

Based on the above, DHS finds that 

notice and comment rulemaking, in this 

instance, would be impracticable, 

unnecessary, and contrary to the public 

interest. For the same reason, DHS finds 

good cause to make this rule effective 

immediately upon publication in the 

Federal Register. See 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). 

In addition, because this final rule 

relieves a restriction, and because the 

States will now have more time to 

ensure that the documents they issue 

meet the security requirements of the 

REAL ID Act, there is good cause to 

make this rule effective immediately 

upon publication in the Federal 

Register. 

B. Executive Order 13563 and Executive 

Order 12866 

This rule constitutes a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866, as supplemented by 

Executive Order 13563, and therefore 

has been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). 

Executive Order 12866 defines 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as one 

that is likely to result in a rule that may 

(1) have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more or 

adversely affect in a material way the 

economy, a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local, or Tribal governments or 

communities; (2) create a serious 

inconsistency or otherwise interfere 

with an action taken or planned by 

another agency; (3) materially alter the 

budgetary impact of entitlements, 

grants, user fees, or loan programs or the 

rights or obligations of recipients 

thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy 

issues arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

set forth in the Executive Order. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 

1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended by 

the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. 

L. 104–121), requires Federal agencies 

to consider the potential impact of 

regulations on small businesses, small 

governmental jurisdictions, and small 

organizations during the development of 

their rules. This final rule, however, 

makes changes for which notice and 

comment are not necessary. 

Accordingly, DHS is not required to 

prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis. 

5 U.S.C. 603, 604. 

D. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule calls for no new collection 

of information under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– 

3520). 

E. Executive Order 12132 (Federalism) 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

‘‘Federalism,’’ if it has a substantial 

direct effect on State or local 

governments and would either preempt 

State law or impose a substantial direct 

cost of compliance on them. We have 

analyzed this rule under that Order and 

have determined that it does not have 

these implications for federalism. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 12271 

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act addresses actions that may 

result in the expenditure by a State, 

local, or Tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100 million (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. This final rule 

will not result in such an expenditure. 

G. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal 

Consultation) 

This rule does not have Tribal 

Implications under Executive Order 

13175, ‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments,’’ 

because it does not have a substantial 

direct effect on one or more Indian 

Tribes, on the relationship between the 

Federal Government and Indian Tribes, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes. 

H. Executive Order 13175 (Energy 

Impact Analysis) 

DHS has analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use.’’ DHS has 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that Order and is 

not likely to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy. Therefore, it does not require 

a Statement of Energy Effects under 

Executive Order 13211. 

List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 37 

Document security, Driver’s licenses, 

Identification cards, Motor vehicle 

administrations, Physical security. 

The Amendments 

For the reasons set forth above, the 

Department of Homeland Security 

amends 6 CFR part 37 as follows: 

PART 37—REAL ID DRIVER’S 

LICENSES AND IDENTIFICATION 

CARDS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 37 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30301 note 6 U.S.C. 

111, 112. 

§ 37.51 [Amended] 

■ 2. Amend § 37.51(a) by removing the 

date ‘‘May 11, 2011’’ and adding in its 

place the date ‘‘January 15, 2013.’’ 

Janet Napolitano, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2011–5002 Filed 3–4–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–9B–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 712 

RIN 1992–AZ00 

Human Reliability Program: 

Identification of Reviewing Official 

AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: DOE is amending the Human 

Reliability Program (HRP) rule to 

designate the appropriate Under 

Secretary as the person with the 

authority to issue a final written 

decision to recertify or revoke the 

certification of an individual in the 

HRP. This action places decisional 

authority in the Under Secretary 

responsible for the operational 

functioning of the program in which the 

certification issue arises. It also 

streamlines internal procedures and 

facilitates timely final agency decisionmaking. This amendment modifies 

internal agency responsibilities but does 

not alter substantive rights or 

obligations under current law. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is 

effective on March 7, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Gurney, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–53, 1000 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20585; 

John.Gurney@hq.doe.gov; 202–586– 

8269; Dane Woodard, Office of 

Personnel Security, 1000 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585; 

Dane.Woodard@hq.doe.gov; 202–586– 

4148. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 

1954 (the AEA), the DOE owns, leases, 

operates or supervises activities at 

facilities in various locations in the 

United States. Many of these facilities 

are involved in researching, testing, 

producing, disassembling, or 

transporting nuclear explosives, which, 

when combined with Department of 

Defense delivery systems, become 

nuclear weapons systems. These 

facilities are often involved in other 

activities that affect the national 

security. Compromise of these and other 

DOE facilities would severely damage 

national security. To guard against such 

compromise, DOE established the 

Human Reliability Program (HRP), 10 

CFR part 712. 69 FR 3213 (January 23, 

2004). The HRP is designed to ensure 

that individuals who occupy positions 

affording unescorted access to certain 

materials, facilities, and programs meet 

the highest standards of reliability, as 

well as physical and mental suitability, 

through a system of continuous 

evaluation of those individuals. The 

purpose of this continuous evaluation is 

to identify, in a timely manner, 

individuals whose judgment may be 

impaired by physical or mental/ 

personality disorders; the use of illegal 

drugs or the abuse of legal drugs or 

other substances; the abuse of alcohol; 

or any other condition or circumstance 

that may represent a reliability, safety, 

or security concern. 

The HRP requires that all individuals 

who work in positions affording 

unescorted access to certain materials, 

facilities, and programs be certified as 

meeting the highest standards of 

reliability and physical and mental/ 

personality suitability before such 

access may be granted. 

Under current regulations, an 

individual’s HRP certification is subject 

to immediate review in the event a 

supervisor has a reasonable belief that 

the individual is not reliable, based on 

either a safety or security concern (10 

CFR 712.19(a)). During the pendency of 

the review, the individual will be 

removed from assigned HRP duties. 

This temporary removal is an interim, 

precautionary action and does not 

constitute a determination of reliability 

or access authorization status. If the 

removal is based on a general security 

concern, 10 CFR 712.19 provides for 

resolution under 10 CFR part 710, 

subpart A (General Criteria and 

Procedures for Determining Eligibility 

for Access to Classified Matter or 

Special Nuclear Material). Individuals 

who are removed from HRP duties for 

reasons not related to general security 

concerns (e.g., reliability) are entitled to 

resolve these issues through a formal 

procedure outlined in 10 CFR 712.19 

through 712.23. The part 712 

regulations require that the individual 

be given a written statement of the 

issues, an opportunity to respond, 

including an opportunity for a hearing 

before a DOE Office of Hearings and 

Appeals hearing officer, and an 

opportunity to have the opinion of the 

hearing officer reviewed at a higher 

level before a final determination is 

made. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES