65332 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

1See 49 CFR 1520.5 for a description of SSI 

material.

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Transportation Security Administration 

49 CFR Part 1522

[Docket No. TSA–2004–19605] 

RIN 1652–AA33

Fees for Security Threat Assessments 

for Hazmat Drivers

AGENCY: Transportation Security 

Administration (TSA), Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: In response to recent statutory 

requirements, the Transportation 

Security Administration (TSA) proposes 

to establish a fee for security threat 

assessments that TSA is required to 

perform on individuals who apply for or 

renew a hazardous materials 

endorsement for a commercial driver’s 

license. TSA also proposes to establish 

a fee for collection and transmission of 

fingerprints, which is necessary to 

perform the security threat assessments. 

TSA intends to use fees collected under 

this proposed rule to pay for the costs 

of the security threat assessments and 

the costs of collection and transmission 

of fingerprints.

DATES: Submit comments by December 

1, 2004.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

to this rulemaking, identified by the 

TSA docket number, using any one of 

the following methods:

Comments Filed Electronically: You 

may submit comments through the 

docket Web site at http://dms.dot.gov.

Please be aware that anyone is able to 

search the electronic form of all 

comments received into any of our 

dockets by the name of the individual 

submitting the comment (or signing the 

comment, if submitted on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

You may review the applicable Privacy 

Act Statement published in the Federal 

Register on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477), or you may visit http://

dms.dot.gov.

You also may submit comments 

through the Federal eRulemaking portal 

at http://www.regulations.gov.

Comments Submitted by Mail, Fax, or 

In Person: Address or deliver your 

written, signed comments to the Docket 

Management System, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, Room Plaza 401, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20590–0001; Fax: 202–493–2251. 

Comments that include trade secrets, 

confidential commercial or financial 

information, or sensitive security 

information (SSI) should not be 

submitted to the public regulatory 

docket.1 Please submit such comments 

separately from other comments on the 

rule. Comments containing trade 

secrets, confidential commercial or 

financial information, or SSI should be 

appropriately marked as containing 

such information and submitted by mail 

to the individual listed in FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT.

Reviewing Comments in the Docket:

You may review the public docket 

containing comments in person in the 

Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The Dockets Office is 

located on the plaza level of the NASSIF 

Building at the Department of 

Transportation address above. Also, you 

may review public dockets on the 

Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for 

format and other information about 

comment submissions.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions: Mr. Randall Fiertz, 

Office of Revenue, Transportation 

Security Administration Headquarters, 

West Building, Floor 12, TSA–14, 601 

South 12th Street, Arlington, VA 22202; 

telephone: (571) 227–2323; e-mail: 

TSA–Fees@dhs.gov.

For legal questions: Mr. Dion Casey, 

Office of Chief Counsel, Transportation 

Security Administration Headquarters, 

East Building, Floor 12, TSA–2, 601 

South 12th Street, Arlington, VA 22202; 

telephone: (571) 227–2663; e-mail: 

Dion.Casey@dhs.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited 

TSA invites interested persons to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

submitting written comments, data, or 

views. We also invite comments relating 

to the economic, environmental, energy, 

or federalism impacts that might result 

from adopting the proposals in this 

document. See ADDRESSES above for 

information on where to submit 

comments. 

Comments that include trade secrets, 

confidential commercial or financial 

information, or SSI should not be 

submitted to the public regulatory 

docket. Please submit such comments 

separately from other comments on the 

proposed rule. Comments containing 

this type of information should be 

appropriately marked and submitted to 

the address specified in the ADDRESSES

section. Upon receipt of such 

comments, TSA will not place the 

comments in the public docket and will 

handle them in accordance with 

applicable safeguards and restrictions 

on access. TSA will hold them in a 

separate file to which the public does 

not have access, and place a note in the 

public docket that TSA has received 

such materials from the commenter. If 

TSA receives a request to examine or 

copy this information, TSA would treat 

it as any other request under the 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 

U.S.C. 552) and the Department of 

Homeland Security’s FOIA regulation 

found in 6 Code of Federal Regulation 

(CFR) part 5. 

With each comment, please include 

your name and address, identify the 

docket number at the beginning of your 

comments, and give the reason for each 

comment. The most helpful comments 

reference a specific portion of the 

proposal, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. You may submit 

comments and material electronically, 

in person, or by mail as provided under 

ADDRESSES, but please submit your 

comments and material by only one 

means. If you submit comments by mail 

or delivery, submit them in two copies, 

in an unbound format, no larger than 8.5 

by 11 inches, suitable for copying and 

electronic filing. 

If you want TSA to acknowledge 

receipt of your comments on this 

rulemaking, include with your 

comments a self-addressed, stamped 

postcard on which the docket number 

appears. We will stamp the date on the 

postcard and mail it to you. 

Except for comments containing 

confidential information and SSI, we 

will file in the public docket all 

comments we receive, as well as a 

report summarizing each substantive 

public contact with TSA personnel 

concerning this rulemaking. The docket 

is available for public inspection before 

and after the comment closing date.

We will consider all comments we 

receive on or before the closing date for 

comments. We will consider comments 

filed late to the extent practicable. We 

may change this rulemaking in light of 

the comments we receive. 

Availability of Rulemaking Document 

You can get an electronic copy using 

the Internet by— 

(1) Searching the Department of 

Transportation’s electronic Docket 

Management System (DMS) Web page 

(http://dms.dot.gov/search); 

(2) Accessing the Government 

Printing Office’s Web page at http://

www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/

aces140.html; or 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 65333

2Pub. L. 107–71, November 19, 2001, 115 Stat. 

597.

3Section 403 of Pub. L. 107–296, November 25, 

2002, 116 Stat. 2135, codified at 6 U.S.C. 203.

4 49 U.S.C. 114(d).

5 49 U.S.C. 114(f)(2).

6Pub. L. 107–56, October 25, 2001, 115 Stat. 272.

7 68 FR 10988, March 7, 2003.

8The National Crime Prevention and Privacy 

Compact (Compact) is authorized under 42 U.S.C. 

14616 to establish legal criteria governing criminal 

history record checks for non-criminal justice 

purposes. The Compact Council is composed of 15 

members, appointed by the Attorney General. As a 

general rule, the Compact Council requires the 

submission of fingerprints for purposes of gaining 

access to criminal history databases for noncriminal justice purposes.

9See 49 U.S.C. 114(f).

10Pub. L. 107–296, November 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 

2280, codified at 18 U.S.C. 842.

11The penalty for violation of 18 U.S.C. 842(i) is 

up to ten years imprisonment and a fine of up to 

$250,000.

(3) Visiting TSA’s Law and Policy 

Web page at http://www.tsa.dot.gov/

public/index.jsp.

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. 

Abbreviations and Terms Used in This 

Document 

ATF—Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, 

Firearms, and Explosives 

AAMVA—Association of American 

Motor Vehicle Administrators 

ATSA—Aviation and Transportation 

Security Act 

BLS—Bureau of Labor Statistics 

BTS—Bureau of Transportation 

Statistics 

CDL—commercial drivers license 

CDLIS—Commercial Drivers License 

Information System 

CFR—Code of Federal Regulations 

CHRC—criminal history records check 

DHS—Department of Homeland 

Security 

DOT—Department of Transportation 

FBI—Federal Bureau of Investigation 

FMCSA—Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

HME—hazardous materials 

endorsement 

ICE—Bureau of Immigration and 

Customs Enforcement 

IFR—interim final rule 

NPRM—notice of proposed rulemaking 

PRA—Paperwork Reduction Act 

SEA—Safe Explosives Act 

TSA—Transportation Security 

Administration 

I. Background 

On September 11, 2001, several 

terrorist attacks were made against the 

United States. Those attacks resulted in 

catastrophic human casualties and 

property damage. In response to those 

attacks, Congress passed the Aviation 

and Transportation Security Act 

(ATSA), which established the 

Transportation Security Administration 

(TSA).2 TSA was created as an agency 

within the Department of 

Transportation (DOT), operating under 

the direction of the Under Secretary of 

Transportation for Security. As of March 

1, 2003, pursuant to the Homeland 

Security Act of 2002, TSA became an 

agency of the Department of Homeland 

Security (DHS), and the Under Secretary 

is now the Assistant Secretary of 

Homeland Security for TSA.3 TSA 

continues to possess the statutory 

authority that ATSA established. ATSA 

granted to the Assistant Secretary 

responsibility for security in all modes 

of transportation.4

ATSA authorizes TSA to identify 

individuals who pose a threat to 

transportation security.5 This authority 

includes conducting background checks 

on individuals in the transportation 

industries. The background checks may 

include collecting fingerprints to 

determine if an individual has a 

criminal conviction or the use of a name 

and other identifying characteristics to 

determine whether an individual has 

committed international criminal 

offenses or immigration offenses.

Based on his functions, duties, and 

powers, the Assistant Secretary is 

situated to determine whether sufficient 

cause exists to believe that an 

individual poses a threat to 

transportation security. 

A. USA PATRIOT Act 

The Uniting and Strengthening 

America by Providing Appropriate 

Tools Required to Intercept and 

Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT) Act 

was enacted on October 25, 2001.6

Section 1012 of the USA PATRIOT Act 

amended 49 U.S.C. Chapter 51 by 

adding a new section 5103a titled 

‘‘Limitation on issuance of hazmat 

licenses.’’ Section 5103a(a)(1) provides:

A State may not issue to any individual a 

license to operate a motor vehicle 

transporting in commerce a hazardous 

material unless the Secretary of 

Transportation has first determined, upon 

receipt of a notification under subsection 

(c)(1)(B), that the individual does not pose a 

security risk warranting denial of the license.

Section 5103a(a)(2) subjects license 

renewals to the same requirements.

Section 5103a(c) requires the Attorney 

General, upon the request of a State in 

connection with issuance of a hazardous 

materials endorsement (HME) for a 

commercial drivers license (CDL), to 

carry out a background records check of 

the individual applying for the 

endorsement and, upon completing the 

check, to notify the Secretary of 

Transportation of the results. The 

Secretary of Transportation then 

determines whether the individual 

poses a security threat warranting denial 

of the endorsement. The Secretary of 

Transportation delegated the authority 

to carry out the provisions of Section 

5103a to the Under Secretary of 

Transportation for Security (now the 

Assistant Secretary of Homeland 

Security for TSA).7

The background records check must 

consist of: (1) a check of the relevant 

criminal history databases; (2) in the 

case of an alien, a check of the relevant 

databases to determine the status of the 

alien under U.S. immigration laws; and 

(3) as appropriate, a check of the 

relevant international databases through 

Interpol-U.S. National Central Bureau or 

other appropriate means.8 As explained 

in further detail below, TSA is 

performing a more comprehensive 

check than required by Section 5103a, 

including a review of pertinent 

databases to determine whether an 

individual poses a security threat. TSA 

has the authority to perform such 

comprehensive checks under ATSA.9

B. Safe Explosives Act 

Congress enacted the Safe Explosives 

Act (SEA) on November 25, 2002.10

Sections 1121–1123 of the SEA 

amended section 842(i) of Title 18 of the 

U.S. Code by adding several categories 

to the list of persons who may not 

lawfully ‘‘ship or transport any 

explosive in or affecting interstate or 

foreign commerce’’ or ‘‘receive or 

possess any explosive which has been 

shipped or transported in or affecting 

interstate or foreign commerce.’’ Prior to 

the amendment, 18 U.S.C. 842(i) 

prohibited the transportation of 

explosives by any person under 

indictment for or convicted of a felony, 

a fugitive from justice, an unlawful user 

or addict of any controlled substance, 

and any person who had been 

adjudicated as a mental defective or 

committed to a mental institution. The 

amendment added three new categories 

to the list of prohibited persons: aliens 

(with certain limited exceptions), 

persons dishonorably discharged from 

the armed forces, and former U.S. 

citizens who have renounced their 

citizenship. Individuals who violate 18 

U.S.C. 842(i) are subject to criminal 

prosecution.11 These incidents are 

investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, 

Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives 

65334 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

12Explosives are among the categories of 

substances that are defined as hazardous materials 

under DOT regulations. See 49 CFR 383.5 and 

173.50.

13 68 FR 23852. The rule was codified at 49 CFR 

parts 1570 and 1572. On the same date, the FMCSA 

issued a companion rule prohibiting States from 

issuing, renewing, transferring, or upgrading a CDL 

with an HME unless TSA has first determined that 

the individual applying for the HME does not pose 

a security threat warranting denial of the HME. 68 

FR 23844. Because the FMCSA is a part of DOT, 

and because the FMCSA and TSA rules regulate the 

transport of hazardous materials, including 

explosives, with regard to safety, the exception in 

18 U.S.C. 845(a)(1) is triggered.

14An individual may appeal a determination if 

the individual believes that he or she does not meet 

the criteria warranting revocation. For example, an 

individual may appeal because he or she believes 

the criminal record to be incorrect, or if the 

individual’s conviction for a disqualifying criminal 

offense was pardoned, expunged, or overturned on 

appeal. 15Such individuals are permitted to apply for a 

waiver if they can demonstrate that they are 

rehabilitated or are no longer a danger to 

themselves or others.

16 In the companion Hazmat Program Rule, 

discussed herein, TSA is amending the May 5 IFR 

to permit one security threat assessment for a 

transfer applicant during the period of time 

required in the driver’s original State of issuance. 

For instance, if the renewal period in Virginia is 

once every 4 years, a driver who obtains his HME 

in Virginia in 2005 and moves to West Virginia in 

2006, where the renewal period is once every 5 

years, is required to undergo a new security threat 

assessment in 2009 in West Virginia, rather than 

within 30 days of moving into West Virginia or in 

2010. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration’s regulations require renewing the 

HME at least once every five years, so drivers across 

the country have nearly identical renewal periods. 

(49 CFR 383.141(d)). Thus, there is no risk that any 

driver will go more that five years without a 

security threat assessment.

17An exception to this effective date was a 

provision in the May 5 IFR that required any holder 

of an HME who had committed a disqualifying 

offense to surrender the HME to the State by 

September 2003.

18 68 FR 63033 (November 7, 2003).

19 69 FR 17696 (April 6, 2004).

20 Department of Homeland Security 

Appropriations Act, 2004, Section 520, Pub. L. 108–

90, October 1, 2003, 117 Stat. 1137 (2004 

Appropriations Act).

(ATF) of the Department of Justice and 

referred, as appropriate, to the United 

States Attorneys.

However, 18 U.S.C. 845(a)(1) provides 

an exception to section 842(i) for ‘‘any 

aspect of the transportation of explosive 

materials via railroad, water, highway, 

or air which are regulated by the United 

States Department of Transportation and 

agencies thereof, and which pertains to 

safety.’’ Under this exception, if DOT 

regulations address the transportation 

security issues of persons engaged in a 

particular aspect of the safe 

transportation of explosive materials, 

then those persons are not subject to 

prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 842(i) 

while they are engaged in the 

transportation of explosives in 

commerce.12

This exception was triggered when 

TSA issued the May 5 Interim Final 

Rule, discussed below, in coordination 

with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA) and Research 

and Special Programs Administration 

(RSPA), agencies within the DOT. 

C. The May 5, 2003 Interim Final Rule 

To comply with the mandates of the 

USA PATRIOT Act, and to trigger the 

exception in 18 U.S.C. 845(a)(1) for the 

transportation of explosives, TSA issued 

an interim final rule in coordination 

with FMCSA and RSPA on May 5, 2003 

(the May 5 IFR).13 The May 5 IFR 

established security threat assessment 

standards for determining whether an 

individual poses a security threat 

warranting denial of an HME. Under the 

May 5 IFR, TSA determines that an 

individual poses a security threat if he 

or she: (1) Is an alien (unless he or she 

is a lawful permanent resident) or a U.S. 

citizen who has renounced his or her 

U.S. citizenship; (2) is wanted or under 

indictment for certain felonies; (3) was 

convicted or found not guilty by reason 

of insanity of any of certain felonies in 

military or civilian court within the past 

7 years or was released from 

incarceration for committing any of the 

specified felonies within the past 5 

years; (4) has been adjudicated as a 

mental defective or involuntarily 

committed to a mental institution; or (5) 

is considered to pose a security threat 

based on a review of pertinent 

databases.

The May 5 FIR also established 

conditions under which an individual 

who has been determined to be a 

security threat may appeal the 

determination, and procedures TSA 

follows when considering an appeal.14

In addition, the May 5 IFR provides a 

waiver process for those individuals 

who otherwise could not obtain an HME 

due to a disqualifying felony conviction 

or mental defect.15 Finally, the May 5 

IFR prohibits an individual from 

holding, and a State from issuing, 

renewing, or transferring an HME for a 

driver unless the individual has met the 

TSA security threat assessment 

standards or has been granted a 

waiver.16 The May 5 IFR was to take 

effect in November 2003.17

In the May 5 IFR, TSA requested and 

received comments from the States, 

labor organizations, and representatives 

of the trucking industry. In addition, 

TSA held working group sessions with 

the States to discuss potential 

fingerprinting systems that would 

achieve the statutory requirements, but 

would not adversely impact the States. 

Based on the comments received and 

the working sessions with the States, 

TSA issued a technical amendment in 

November 2003 to extend the date on 

which fingerprints and applicant 

information must be submitted.18 A 

majority of the States could not 

implement the program by November, 

and TSA did not have statutory 

authority to collect fees to cover TSA’s 

implementation costs. This technical 

amendment required the States to either 

submit fingerprints and applicant 

information by April 1, 2004 or request 

an extension of time and produce a 

fingerprint collection plan by April 1, 

2004. All States were required to have 

the fingerprint collection program in 

place as of December 1, 2004.

In response to the November 2003 

technical amendment, a majority of the 

States asked for an extension of time 

because they were not ready to begin 

collecting applicant information or 

fingerprints by April 1, 2004. Therefore, 

on April 6, 2004, TSA published a final 

rule removing the April 1 date and 

establishing January 31, 2005 as the date 

on which States must begin complying 

with the requirements.19

D. Fee Authority 

On October 1, 2003, legislation was 

enacted authorizing TSA to collect 

reasonable fees to cover the costs of 

providing credentialing and background 

investigations in the transportation 

field, including implementation of the 

USA PATRIOT Act requirements.20

Section 520 of the Department of 

Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 

2004 (2004 Appropriations Act) 

authorizes TSA to collect fees to pay for 

the following costs: Conducting or 

obtaining a criminal history records 

check (CHRC); reviewing available law 

enforcement databases, commercial 

databases, and records of other 

governmental and international 

agencies; reviewing and adjudicating 

requests for waivers and appeals of TSA 

decisions; and any other costs related to 

performing the background records 

check or providing the credential.

Section 520 of the 2004 

Appropriations Act mandates that any 

fee collected shall be available for 

expenditure only to pay for the costs 

incurred in providing services in 

connection with performing the 

background check or providing the 

credential. The fee shall remain 

available until expended. 

II. Companion Hazmat Program Rule 

In a related interim final rule (IFR), 

titled ‘‘Security Threat Assessment for 

Individuals Applying for a Hazardous 

Materials Endorsement for a 

Commercial Driver’s License’’ RIN 1652-

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 65335

21The FBI is authorized to establish and collect 

fees to process fingerprint identification records 

and name checks for non-criminal justice, non-law 

enforcement employment and licensing purposes 

that may be used for salaries and other expenses 

incurred in providing these services. See Title II of 

Pub. L. 101–515, November 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 2112, 

codified in a note to 28 U.S.C. 534.

22 31 U.S.C. 3512.

23 In July 2004, TSA used HME applicant names 

and biographical data to conduct threat assessments 

on all current HME holders. The threat assessment 

included entering names and biographical data in 

the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) 

database, the Interstate Identification Index (III), 

and other databases, such as terrorism watch lists. 

TSA noted its intent to conduct these threat 

assessments in the May 5 IFR.

24Transportation Statistics Annual Reports, 2001,

p.120; Transportation Statistics Annual Reports, 

2003, p.106; Commodity Flow Survey: Hazardous 

Materials, U.S Department of Transportation, 

Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S. Census 

Bureau, Economic Census, 1997, p.9; Vehicle 

Inventory and Use Survey, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, 1997. In reaching 

this estimate, TSA extrapolated 1997–2003 data and 

applied it to current hazardous materials volume, 

driver, and truck estimates.

25To estimate the volume of HME holders 

expected to submit to the TSA security threat 

assessment processes, TSA conducted phone 

interviews during the months of June and July 2004 

with representatives from the following 

organizations: American Trucking Association; 

Estes Express Lines; International Brotherhood of 

Teamsters; Motor Freight Carriers’ Associations; 

National Private Truck Council; National Tank 

Truck Carriers, Inc.; and the Truckload Carriers 

Association.

AA17 (the Hazmat Program Rule), that 

is to be issued in association with this 

proposed fee rule (the Fee NPRM), TSA 

plans to require States to choose 

between two fingerprint and applicant 

information collection options. TSA 

intends to require each State to either: 

(1) collect and transmit the fingerprints 

and applicant information of 

individuals who apply for or renew an 

HME; or (2) allow an entity approved by 

TSA (TSA agent) to collect and transmit 

the fingerprints and applicant 

information of such individuals. TSA 

plans to require States to notify TSA in 

writing of their choice within 30 days of 

the date the Hazmat Program Rule is 

published in the Federal Register. If a 

State does not notify TSA in writing of 

its choice by that date, TSA will assume 

that the State has chosen the second 

option and will work with the State to 

establish a system for a TSA agent to 

collect fingerprints and applicant 

information in the State. The State will 

be required to operate under the option 

it chooses until at least February 1, 

2008. 

As discussed in more detail below, 

the State’s fingerprint and applicant 

information collection choice under the 

Hazmat Program Rule affects its 

obligations under the Fee NPRM and 

affects the fee to be charged.

III. Summary of the Proposed Rule 

To comply with the mandates of 

Section 520 of the 2004 Appropriations 

Act, as well as the mandates of the USA 

PATRIOT Act and the SEA, TSA 

proposes to establish user fees for 

individuals who apply for or renew an 

HME, and thus are required to undergo 

a security threat assessment in 

accordance with 49 CFR part 1572. TSA 

proposes to establish two new user fees 

in addition to the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation’s (FBI) fee 21 for 

performing the CHRC on behalf of 

government agencies for nongovernmental applicants: (1) To cover 

TSA’s costs of performing and 

adjudicating security threat 

assessments, appeals, and waivers 

(Threat Assessment Fee), and (2) to 

cover the costs of collecting and 

transmitting fingerprints and applicant 

information (Information Collection 

Fee).

Under the proposed rule, if a State 

opts to collect fingerprints and 

applicant information itself under the 

Hazmat Program Rule, the State would 

be required to (1) collect and remit to 

TSA the Threat Assessment Fee in 

accordance with the requirements of the 

Fee NPRM and (2) collect and remit to 

the FBI its user fee to perform a CHRC 

for matches of non-governmental 

applicant names against certain 

disqualifying criminal activity (FBI Fee). 

Nothing in this proposed rule would 

prohibit the State, under its own fee 

authority, from collecting a fee 

determined by the State to cover its 

costs of collecting and transmitting 

fingerprints and applicant information. 

TSA notes that a State may not collect 

a fee under TSA’s fee authority. 

If a State opts to permit a TSA agent 

to collect and transmit fingerprints and 

applicant information, the State would 

not be required to collect and remit to 

TSA any fees under the Fee NPRM. 

Rather, a TSA agent would (1) collect 

and remit to TSA the Threat Assessment 

Fee; (2) collect and remit to the FBI the 

FBI Fee; and (3) collect and keep the 

Information Collection Fee. The exact 

amount of the Information Collection 

Fee will be established by TSA, in 

accordance with Section 520, once all 

the States have determined whether to 

collect and transmit fingerprints and 

applicant information or allow a TSA 

agent to perform these services. These 

State decisions will enable TSA and a 

TSA agent to determine the final 

volume, scale, and costs of these 

services. 

Based on the information currently 

available to the agency, TSA proposes 

the following fees: Information 

Collection Fee $25–$45, Threat 

Assessment Fee $36, and FBI Fee $22 (if 

TSA agent collects) or $24 (if State 

collects). 

Pursuant to the Chief Financial 

Officers Act of 1990, DHS/TSA is 

required to review these fees no less 

than every two years.22 Upon review, if 

it is found that the fees are either too 

high (i.e., total fees exceed the total cost 

to provide the services) or too low (i.e., 

total fees do not cover the total costs to 

provide the services), new fees will be 

proposed.

IV. Hazmat Driver Population 

TSA estimates that there are currently 

2.7 million HME holders throughout the 

United States. This estimate is based on 

the results of the initial name-based 

terrorist threat assessment recently 

performed by TSA on the entire current 

population of HME holders.23 Each 

State and the District of Columbia 

submitted to TSA the names of all 

current (not expired) holders of HMEs. 

This estimate was based on an actual 

head count, rather than a statistical 

sampling or other estimate. However, 

the DOT’s Bureau of Transportation 

Statistics (BTS) and the U.S. Department 

of Commerce’s U.S. Census Bureau have 

historically estimated the number of 

drivers carrying hazardous materials 

(those drivers either carrying primarily 

hazardous materials or carrying such on 

a regular basis) to be in the range of 

500,000–800,000.24 TSA believes this 

disparity between the total current 

number of HME holders and estimated 

‘‘active’’ or ‘‘dedicated’’ drivers of 

hazardous materials suggests that a 

significant portion of the HME holder 

population transport hazardous 

materials rarely or infrequently.

Due to the additional cost, effort, and 

the prospect of disqualification for 

certain felony offenses resulting from 

this security threat assessment, TSA 

expects that a certain number of current 

HME holders who do not actively or 

regularly transport hazardous materials 

will choose not to renew their HME over 

the course of the five-year renewal 

period. TSA bases this assumption on 

recent discussions with various trucking 

industry representatives that will be 

affected by TSA’s security threat 

assessment requirement, including 

trucking associations, union leaders and 

individual trucking companies.25

Industry representatives predict at least 

some decrease in the HME population 

as a result of TSA’s security threat 

assessment regulation. The same 

industry representatives further concur 

that current CDL driver shortages across 

65336 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

26This sample survey decline in total HME 

holders from 2003 to 2004 is also supported by the 

decrease in total HME records in the Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA) 

Commercial Drivers License Information System 

(CDLIS) database. In early 2003, FMCSA reported 

to TSA that the CDLIS contained approximately 3.5 

million total HME holders. TSA published this 

earlier estimate of 3.5 million total HME holders in 

the May 5 IFR.

27 432,000 is calculated by reducing 2.7 million 

HMEs by 20 percent, for a total of 2,160,000, and 

then dividing by 5 to calculate an even distribution 

of TSA’s five-year renewal cycle requirement. HME 

estimates for subsequent recurring years are 

calculated accordingly.

the commercial trucking industry, 

coupled with the fact that drivers are 

not typically paid any wage premium 

specifically for carrying hazardous 

materials, further support TSA’s 

rationale for some reduction of total 

HME holders due to TSA’s security 

threat assessment process.

Empirical data suggest that there has 

been a decline in total HME holders 

over the past year. A recent TSA survey 

of state motor vehicle administrators, 

representing approximately 20 percent 

of the 2.7 million total HME records 

from the States, revealed a one-year 

weighted average decline of 17 percent 

from early 2003 to early 2004.26 TSA 

believes this decline over the past year 

is due, at least in part, to TSA’s security 

threat assessment regulation 

(announced publicly in the May 5 IFR). 

With the imposition of the new fees 

requirement, TSA estimates that there 

will be a 20 percent decline in the HME 

holder population resulting from the 

first year of operations after the Hazmat 

Program Rule takes effect on January 31, 

2005, when the fingerprint and 

application submission and fees will be 

newly required of HME holders when 

their State-issued CDL must be renewed.

Therefore, TSA expects to receive 

approximately 432,000 new and 

renewal applications in the first year 

after January 31, 2005.27 In the second 

and third years, TSA estimates a 5 

percent annual HME population 

decline, for a total of approximately 

410,000 and 390,000 total new and 

renewal applicants, respectively. After 

the third year, TSA estimates that the 

regulatory-induced adjustment on the 

HME holder population will have been 

realized. Thus, in the fourth and fifth 

years, TSA estimates a modest annual 

growth in renewals and new 

applications, in line with that of overall 

estimated domestic non-farm 

employment growth, at 1 percent 

annually. Thus, TSA expects 

approximately 394,000 and 398,000 

total new applicants and renewals, 

respectively, in the fourth and fifth 

years. The total five-year new and 

renewal applicants for whom TSA 

expects to perform security threat 

assessments will thus be approximately 

2.024 million. TSA requests comment 

on these assumptions and estimates.

FIGURE 1.—TSA’S FIVE-YEAR ESTIMATES FOR HAZMAT ENDORSEMENT HOLDER POPULATION, GROWTH AND TOTAL

NEW APPLICANTS AND RENEWALS

Year 

HME holder 

base

population 

Annual

percentage 

growth 

Total new

applicants and 

renewals 

2,700,000 (1) (1)

1 ................................................................................................................................................... 2,160,000 ¥20 432,000 

2 ................................................................................................................................................... 2,052,000 ¥5 410,000 

3 ................................................................................................................................................... 1,949,000 ¥5 390,000 

4 ................................................................................................................................................... 1,969,000 1 394,000 

5 ................................................................................................................................................... 1,989,000 1 398,000 

Totals .................................................................................................................................... (1) (1) 2,024,000 

(1) Not applicable. 

V. Fee Program Overview 

The fee program for the security threat 

assessment consists of three parts, 

discussed below: (A) The Information 

Collection Fee for the collection and 

transmission of fingerprints and 

applicant information; (B) the Threat 

Assessment Fee for the security threat 

assessment and associated notification, 

adjudication, appeal, and waiver 

processes; and (C) the FBI Fee for 

checking applicants’ fingerprints against 

the FBI’s CHRC database to identify past 

criminal offenses as reported to FBI. 

Each of these fees is structured to 

recover the Federal Government’s cost 

of performing these functions. 

TSA notes that some States may opt 

to collect and transmit fingerprints and 

applicant information under their own 

user fee authority. In those States, HME 

applicants will be required under the 

Fee NPRM to remit to the Federal 

Government only the Threat Assessment 

Fee and FBI Fee. Nothing in this 

proposed rule would prohibit the State 

from collecting a fee determined by the 

State under the State’s own fee authority 

to cover its costs of collecting and 

transmitting fingerprints and applicant 

information. TSA notes that a State may 

not collect a fee pursuant to TSA’s fee 

authority to reimburse the State’s costs. 

A discussion of the three fees 

summarized above follows. 

A. Information Collection Fee 

As set forth in the Hazmat Program 

Rule, the security threat assessment 

process requires all drivers who apply 

for or renew an HME to submit 

fingerprints and other biographical 

information. The Hazmat Program Rule 

is expected to require States to choose 

one of the following two options for 

collection and transmission of 

fingerprints and applicant information:

(1) A State may choose to collect and 

transmit fingerprints and applicant 

information itself, either through a State 

agency, such as the State DMV or State 

law enforcement agencies, or by 

contracting with a third party; or 

(2) A State may choose to allow a TSA 

agent to collect and transmit 

fingerprints and applicant information. 

1. Cost of Information Collection 

As noted above, in those States that 

choose to allow a TSA agent to collect 

and transmit fingerprints and applicant 

information, TSA will hire a contractor 

agent to provide those services. Based 

on TSA’s informal research of both 

commercial and government fingerprint 

and information collection services, 

TSA estimates that the per applicant fee 

to collect and transmit fingerprints and 

other required applicant data 

electronically will range from $25 to $45 

per applicant. This range will vary 

based on economies of scale which 

depend primarily on the number of 

States (and thus number of annual HME 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 65337

28For example, if 40 States choose to allow a TSA 

agent to collect fingerprints and applicant 

information, the TSA agent’s economies of scale 

would be greater, and thus the Information 

Collection Fee would be less, than if 15 States 

choose this option.

29These threat assessment standards are 

contained at 49 CFR part 1572.

30All cost and fee estimates in recurring years are 

not adjusted for inflation.

31TSA notes that as the Hazmat Program matures, 

and TSA gains experience with the appeals and 

waiver processes, the agency may need to adjust 

these processes. If TSA adjusts the appeals or 

waiver process, the agency’s costs may increase, 

which would necessitate an increase in the Threat 

Assessment Fee.

new applicants and renewals) that can 

be serviced by one or more agents (i.e., 

TSA’s agent(s) and any agents that the 

States may assign on their behalf to 

perform such services), as well as the 

existing infrastructure that States 

currently have to process fingerprintbased background checks.28 Also 

included in this estimated fee range are 

the costs for required administrative 

support such as providing application 

status to applicants. TSA requests 

comment on these estimates.

2. Information Collection Fee 

Based on the above cost estimate, TSA 

anticipates a per applicant fee for 

information collection and transmission 

to range from $25 to $45. This fee will 

only apply to those HME applicants in 

States that have chosen to have a TSA 

agent perform information collection 

and transmission, as well as related 

administrative support. States that 

choose to perform the information 

collection and transmission functions 

themselves and charge a fee under their 

own user fee authority are responsible 

for establishing their own State fee, in 

accordance with their user fee criteria 

and requirements, to recover the costs of 

performing these services. TSA’s final 

Information Collection Fee may not be 

the same as the fees States may establish 

for performing these services. The 

Information Collection Fee will not 

include the fee charged by FBI to 

process fingerprint identification 

records. 

B. Threat Assessment Fee 

For the TSA security threat 

assessment process, each applicant’s 

information will be checked against 

multiple databases and other 

information sources so TSA can 

determine whether the applicant poses 

a security threat that warrants denial of 

the HME. This check searches for 

potential security threats, immigration 

status, past criminal activity and mental 

incompetence. The threat assessment 

includes an appeal process for 

individuals who believe the records on 

which TSA bases its determination are 

incorrect. TSA will perform all of the 

threat assessment functions. In addition, 

TSA will administer a waiver process 

for applicants who seek a waiver of 

disqualification. Individuals whom TSA 

has determined to pose a security threat 

based on reviews of pertinent databases, 

or who are not in the U.S. lawfully, are 

not eligible for a waiver.29

TSA requests comments on the 

estimated costs discussed below.

1. Start-Up Costs 

TSA’s effort to conduct security threat 

assessments on drivers with an HME 

will require ‘‘start-up’’ costs that TSA 

will incur before January 31, 2005, 

when the Hazmat Program Rule will 

take effect, as well as annual 

‘‘recurring,’’ costs for checks conducted 

in years after January 31, 2005. The 

start-up costs will consist of all the costs 

associated with start-up activities 

necessary to implement the program, 

including costs associated with the 

initial name-based background checks 

performed on the entire population of 

drivers that currently hold an HME. The 

start-up costs also will include the 

systems, personnel, and resources TSA 

will be required to bring on-line to 

conduct security threat assessments on 

applicants renewing or newly applying 

for a CDL with an HME. 

Regardless of whether a State or a 

TSA agent collects and transmits 

fingerprints and applicant information, 

TSA must implement and maintain the 

appropriate systems, resources, and 

personnel to ensure that fingerprints 

and applicant information are ‘‘linked,’’

and that TSA can receive and act on the 

results of the security threat assessment. 

TSA will be required to have the 

necessary resources to perform the 

security threat assessments and process 

appeals, requests for waivers, and 

notification (to the driver and the 

appropriate State) of all results. In 

addition, TSA must also be capable of 

archiving the results of these actions for 

the purpose of drivers newly applying 

or renewing their HME application in 

future years (in the case of drivers who 

successfully appealed a TSA 

background check or were granted a 

waiver). 

TSA estimates that the total start-up 

cost for the Hazmat Program will be 

$4.76 million. This estimate includes: (i) 

$2.67 million for all information 

systems costs, including the 

development and deployment of TSA’s 

Hazardous Materials Endorsement 

Screening Gateway (HMESG)—an 

information system platform that allows 

TSA to submit, receive, and integrate 

security threat assessment information 

from a variety of Federal, State and 

other sources in order to help make 

security threat assessment 

determinations, and related network 

and communication support costs, 

including access to information systems 

from the Association of American Motor 

Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA), the 

Law Enforcement Management System 

(LEMS), Interpol and required disaster 

recovery infrastructure; (ii) $1.89 

million for Federal and contract 

personnel to perform various program 

management functions in support of 

program operations, including support 

and compliance assurance teams for the 

States; and (iii) $197,000 for office costs, 

including mailing costs and program 

travel. See Figure 2 below for additional 

details. 

2. Recurring Costs 

This section summarizes TSA’s 

estimated costs of completing security 

threat assessments on individuals who 

apply for or renew an HME for each year 

after January 31, 2005. Recurring costs 

represent the resources necessary for 

TSA to perform ongoing security threat 

assessments on drivers applying for or 

renewing an HME as well as to maintain 

program infrastructure (e.g. technical 

systems). As previously stated, TSA 

estimates that the population of drivers 

who apply for or renew an HME will be 

432,000 drivers for the first year. 

Pursuant to the Hazmat Program Rule, 

State DMVs will be prohibited from 

issuing or renewing an HME until TSA 

has notified the State that the driver 

(based on a security threat assessment) 

does not pose a security threat. 

TSA estimates that the total annual 

recurring costs will be $14.19 million 

for the first year (i.e., from January 31, 

2005 to January 30, 2006) and between 

$13.23 million and $13.58 million per 

year for the second through fifth years.30

Recurring costs will include the costs of: 

continued development and lifecycle 

maintenance of information systems; 

digitization of applicant biographical 

data; the use of databases containing 

citizenship, international criminal 

history, and other data necessary to 

perform a security threat assessment; 

Federal and contractor personnel to 

perform all program office functions, 

including support of State’s activities in 

the program along with compliance 

assurance; Federal and contractor 

support to perform security threat 

assessments, and to administer and 

document adjudications, appeals, 

waivers, and compliance assurance; 31

65338 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

and office costs, including office space, 

notification mailing costs, and required 

program travel. See Figure 2 below for 

additional cost details.

3. Threat Assessment Total Costs 

Based on its population and cost 

estimates assumptions, TSA estimates 

that the sum total of the start-up and 

first five-years’ recurring costs will be 

$72.42 million. TSA notes that these are 

preliminary estimates that will continue 

to be refined. TSA requests comment on 

these estimates. Recurring years’ costs 

are not adjusted for inflation. All figures 

rounded to the nearest thousand.

BILLING CODE 4910–62–P

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 65339


EP10No04.001</GPH>
65340 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

32 68 FR 23843, May 5, 2003.

33 68 FR 23852, May 5, 2003.

34See Title II of Pub. L. 101–515, November 5, 

1990, 104 Stat. 2112, codified in a note to 28 U.S.C. 

534.

BILLING CODE 4910–62–C

4. Threat Assessment Fee Calculation 

TSA is proposing to charge a fee to 

recover its security threat assessment 

start-up costs as well as recurring costs. 

The start-up costs include costs related 

to the name check security threat 

assessments performed prior to January 

31, 2005, for individuals who currently 

hold an HME as well as other nonrecurring costs required to perform the 

recurring years’ security threat 

assessments that include fingerprint 

submission. Because these costs cannot 

be recovered prior to the full 

implementation of the Hazmat Program, 

and because all HME recipients benefit 

from the services provided as a result of 

the infrastructure and capabilities that 

TSA must develop to implement the 

Hazmat Program, TSA proposes to 

amortize the start-up costs over a 5-year 

period to equitably recover these onetime costs. 

This amortization period coincides 

with the requirement in the FMCSA 

companion rule 32 to the May 5 IFR33

that States mandate a 5-year maximum 

renewal period for the HMEs. Thus, a 5-

year amortization period would mean 

the start-up costs would be borne by all 

individuals who either currently hold 

an HME or who apply for an HME in 

that 5-year period. TSA notes that the 

amortization is done by totaling all startup costs and the 5-year annual recurring 

costs and dividing by 2.024 million 

requests for a new or renewed HME—

the total number expected in the first 5 

years. (See Figure 1).

Based on the estimated costs in Figure 

2, TSA has calculated the per applicant 

Threat Assessment Fee as follows: 

TSA’s estimated start-up costs of $4.76 

million, added to the estimated sum of 

the first five years’ annual recurring 

costs of $67.66 million, equal a total of 

$72.42 million. These total costs are 

then divided by the 2.024 million total 

estimated number of applicants for a 

new or renewed HME over the first five 

years after January 31, 2005. This 

calculation results in an estimated cost 

to each applicant of $35.78, which is 

rounded to $36 per applicant. 

As noted above, if a State chooses to 

collect and transmit fingerprints and 

applicant information under the Hazmat 

Program Rule, the State would still be 

required to collect the Threat 

Assessment Fee on behalf of TSA and 

remit it to TSA in accordance with the 

Fee NPRM. If a State chooses to allow 

a TSA agent to collect and transmit 

fingerprints and applicant information 

under the Hazmat Program Rule, the 

TSA agent would be required to collect 

this fee on behalf of TSA and remit it 

to TSA in accordance with the Fee 

NPRM. 

C. FBI Fee 

As part of the security threat 

assessment, TSA will use FBI’s CHRC 

process. The FBI is authorized to 

establish and collect fees to process 

fingerprint identification records and 

name checks for non-criminal justice, 

non-law enforcement employment and 

licensing purposes that may be used for 

salaries and other expenses incurred in 

providing these services.34 Pursuant to 

Criminal Justice Information Services 

(CJIS) Information Letter 93–3 (October 

8, 1993), this fee is currently set at $24. 

CJIS Information Letter 93–3 provides 

that ‘‘State Identification Bureaus and 

other agencies that channel user-fee 

fingerprint cards to the FBI and account 

for the fees on a monthly basis will 

continue to retain $2 of the payment to 

help offset handling costs.’’ Thus, in 

those States that opt to allow a TSA 

agent to collect and transmit 

fingerprints and applicant information, 

the FBI fingerprint processing charge 

(FBI Fee) will be $22. States that choose 

to collect and transmit fingerprints and 

applicant information on their own may 

charge $24 (the $22 FBI Fee plus the $2 

handling costs), as long as it is 

consistent with CJIS Information Letter 

93–3. The fingerprint processing user 

fee is set by the FBI, and the amount is 

subject to change.

VI. Total Fees 

TSA proposes the following fees for 

HME applicants who submit 

fingerprints and applicant information 

to a TSA agent: 

(1) Information Collection and 

Transmission Fee: $25–$45. 

(2) Threat Assessment Fee: $36. 

(3) FBI Fee: $22. 

Thus, the total fees for such 

applicants would be $83–$103. 

Under the Fee NPRM, in States that 

opt to collect and transmit fingerprints 

and applicant information on their own 

HME applicants would be required to 

pay the $36 Threat Assessment Fee and 

an FBI Fee of $22 or $24, depending on 

the amount charged by the State. TSA 

assumes that such applicants also 

would be required under State user fee 

authority to pay to the State a fee to 

cover the State’s costs of collecting and 

transmitting fingerprints and applicant 

information. That fee should vary from 

State to State. Thus, TSA cannot 

estimate the total fees for such 

applicants. 

VII. Section by Section Analysis 

Section 1522.1 would establish the 

applicability of this part and definitions 

of terms used in this part. This part 

would apply to States that issue an 

HME, individuals who apply for a new 

or renewed HME, and entities that 

collect fees from such individuals on 

behalf of TSA. 

The terms ‘‘commercial drivers 

license,’’ ‘‘endorsement,’’ and 

‘‘hazardous materials’’ would be used as 

defined in FMCSA regulations. 

The term ‘‘day’’ would be defined as 

a calendar day. 

The term ‘‘FBI Fee’’ would be defined 

as the fee required for the cost of the FBI 

to process fingerprint identification 

records and name checks. 

The term ‘‘hazardous materials 

endorsement’’ would be defined as the 

authorization for an individual to 

transport hazardous materials in 

commerce, which must be issued on the 

individual’s commercial driver’s 

license. 

The term ‘‘Information Collection 

Fee’’ would be defined as the fee 

required for the cost of collecting and 

transmitting fingerprints and other 

applicant information under 49 CFR 

part 1572. 

The term ‘‘State’’ would be defined as 

a U.S. State or the District of Columbia. 

The term ‘‘Threat Assessment Fee’’

would be defined as the fee required for 

the cost of TSA adjudicating security 

threat assessments, appeals, and waivers 

under 49 CFR part 1572. 

The term ‘‘TSA agent’’ would be 

defined as an entity approved by TSA 

to collect fingerprints in accordance 

with 49 CFR part 1572 and fees in 

accordance with this subpart. 

Sections 1522.3 through 1522.9 would 

be reserved.

Section 1522.11 would require a State 

that collects fingerprints and applicant 

information under 49 CFR part 1572 to 

collect, handle, and remit to TSA the 

Threat Assessment Fee in accordance 

with the procedures in § 1522.13. 

Section 1522.11 would require a TSA 

agent that collects fingerprints and 

applicant information under 49 CFR 

part 1572 to collect the Information 

Collection Fee, Threat Assessment Fee, 

and FBI Fee in accordance with the 

procedures in § 1522.15. A TSA agent 

also would be required to remit to TSA 

the Threat Assessment Fee and remit to 

the FBI the FBI Fee in accordance with 

that section. 

Section 1522.13 describes the 

procedures a State would be required to 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 65341

follow if the State chooses to collect and 

transmit fingerprints under the Hazmat 

Program Rule. Section 1522.13 would 

pertain only to the collection of Threat 

Assessment Fees to cover TSA’s costs. 

Nothing in this regulation would 

prohibit a State from collecting 

additional fees, under its own user fee 

authority, to cover its costs of collecting 

and transmitting fingerprints and 

applicant information or the costs 

associated with collecting and remitting 

the FBI’s CHRC fee at the time the State 

collects the TSA Threat Assessment Fee 

from HME applicants. 

Paragraph 1522.13(a) would require 

States to impose the Threat Assessment 

Fee when an individual submits an 

application to the State for a new or 

renewed HME in compliance with 49 

CFR part 1572. It also would establish 

the TSA Threat Assessment Fee at $36. 

Finally, it would require the individual 

applying for the HME to remit the 

Threat Assessment Fee to the State in 

which the individual is applying for the 

HME, in a form and manner approved 

by TSA and the State. 

Paragraph 1522.13(b) would require 

each State to collect the Threat 

Assessment Fee from an individual at 

the time the individual submits an 

application for a new or renewed HME. 

TSA expects that as States become fully 

operational for purposes of this part, 

TSA will be receiving names frequently 

and far in advance of the States 

remitting the Threat Assessment Fee. 

Therefore, it is vital that the States 

collect the Threat Assessment Fee under 

this part from the applicant as the 

application is submitted. In addition, 

paragraph 1522.13(d)(8) provides that 

TSA does not envision issuing any 

refunds. Once the application is 

received by TSA, analysis of the 

application would commence 

immediately. Therefore, TSA incurs the 

costs of performing the analysis 

immediately. Paragraph 1522.13(b)(2) 

clarifies that once TSA receives an 

application from a State for a security 

threat assessment in accordance with 49 

CFR part 1572, the State is liable for the 

Threat Assessment Fee. 

Paragraph 1522.13(c) would establish 

requirements for the handling of Threat 

Assessment Fees collected by the States 

prior to remittance to TSA. Because the 

States are collecting the Threat 

Assessment Fees on behalf of TSA, the 

fees would be considered to be held in 

trust for the beneficial interest of the 

United States. Thus, States would be 

required to safeguard all Threat 

Assessment Fees collected until they are 

remitted to TSA. In addition, States 

would be required to account for Threat 

Assessment Fees separately. However 

States would be permitted to commingle 

such fees with other sources of revenue. 

Paragraph 1522.13(d) would establish 

procedures for the remittance of Threat 

Assessment Fees to TSA. States would 

be required to remit all Threat 

Assessment Fees collected under this 

part to TSA on a monthly basis. Every 

month, TSA would issue an invoice to 

each State based on the number of HME 

applications the State has sent to TSA. 

For example, if a State sends TSA 100 

HME applications during the month of 

February, TSA would bill the State 

$3600 (100 × $36). The State would be 

required to pay the invoice in full 

within 30 days of the date that TSA 

sends the invoice to the State. 

The payments would be required to 

be remitted to TSA by electronic funds 

transfer, check, money order, wire, or 

draft, payable to the ‘‘Transportation 

Security Administration’’ in U.S. 

currency and drawn on a U.S. bank. 

States would be allowed to retain any 

interest that accrues on the principal 

amounts of the Threat Assessment Fees 

between the date of collection and the 

date the fees are remitted to TSA, not to 

exceed 30 days from the date that TSA 

sends the invoice to the State. 

Paragraph (d) also would specify that 

TSA accept fees only from a State, not 

from an individual HME applicant. TSA 

would not issue any fee refunds, and, if 

a State does not remit the Threat 

Assessment Fees, TSA could decline to 

process any HME applications from that 

State. TSA would reserve the right to 

take any other appropriate action 

against delinquent States, as necessary. 

TSA requests comments on all aspects 

of these proposed procedures for States. 

Section 1522.15 describes the 

procedures that a TSA agent and an 

HME applicant would be required to 

follow if a State chooses to permit a 

TSA agent to collect fingerprints and 

applicant information under the Hazmat 

Program Rule. Paragraph 1522.15(a) 

would require an individual applying 

for an HME to remit the Threat 

Assessment Fee, FBI Fee, and 

Information Collection Fee to the TSA 

agent, in a form and manner approved 

by TSA, when the individual submits an 

application pursuant to part 1572 to the 

TSA agent. It also would establish the 

Threat Assessment Fee at $36, the FBI 

Fee at $22, and the Information 

Collection Fee at $25–$45.

Paragraph 1522.15(b) states that a 

TSA agent will collect the fees required 

under this section when an individual 

submits an application pursuant to 49 

CFR part 1572. 

Paragraph 1522.15(c) would require 

that fees remitted under this section be 

remitted to TSA by electronic funds 

transfer, check, money order, wire, or 

draft, payable to the ‘‘Transportation 

Security Administration’’ in U.S. 

currency and drawn on a U.S. bank. It 

also would specify that TSA will not 

issue any refunds of fees submitted 

under this section. Finally, it would 

specify that applications submitted 

under 49 CFR part 1572 would be 

processed only upon receipt of all 

applicable fees. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), as 

amended, requires consideration of the 

impact of paperwork and other 

information collection burdens imposed 

on the public. As provided by the PRA, 

an agency may not conduct or sponsor, 

and a person is not required to respond 

to, a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) control 

number. TSA has determined that there 

are no new information collection 

requirements associated with this 

proposed rule. 

TSA notes that the Hazmat Program 

Rule requires drivers to submit their 

fingerprints and other biographical 

information. Those requirements may be 

considered an information collection 

burden under the PRA. Since they are 

imposed under the Hazmat Program 

Rule, they will be discussed in that 

rulemaking. 

Regulatory Analyses 

Proposed changes to Federal 

regulations must undergo several 

economic analyses. First, Executive 

Order 12866 directs each Federal agency 

to propose or adopt a regulation only if 

the agency makes a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its costs. 

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 605(b)) requires 

agencies to analyze the economic 

impact of regulatory changes on small 

entities. Third, the Trade Agreements 

Act (19 U.S.C. 2531–2533) prohibits 

agencies from setting standards that 

create unnecessary obstacles to the 

foreign commerce of the United States. 

In developing U.S. standards, the Trade 

Agreement Act requires agencies to 

consider international standards, where 

appropriate, as the basis of U.S. 

standards. Fourth, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public 

Law 104–4) requires agencies to prepare 

a written assessment of the costs, 

benefits, and other effects of proposed 

or final rules that include a Federal 

mandate likely to result in the 

expenditure by State, local, or tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

65342 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

annually (adjusted for inflation). 

In conducting these analyses, TSA has 

determined: 

1. This proposed rule is a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined in the 

Executive Order because there is 

significant public interest in security 

issues since September 11, 2001. 

However, TSA estimates that the 

proposed rule would not exceed the 

$100 million annual threshold that 

would cause it to be economically 

significant. 

2. An initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis suggests the proposed rule 

would not have a significant impact on 

a substantial number of small entities; 

3. The proposed rule would impose 

no significant barriers to international 

trade; and 

4. The proposed rule would not 

impose an unfunded mandate on State, 

local, or tribal governments, or on the 

private sector in excess of $100 million 

annually. 

Below is a summary of each section 

of the Fee NPRM and its respective cost 

impact. 

Executive Order 12866 Assessment 

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993), provides for making 

determinations whether a regulatory 

action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore 

subject to OMB review and to the 

requirements of the Executive Order. 

TSA has determined that this action is 

a significant regulatory action within 

the meaning of Executive Order 12866 

because there is significant public 

interest in security issues since 

September 11, 2001, as well as the 

background check requirements in the 

Hazmat Program Rule. 

This proposed rule responds to the 

requirements of Section 520 of the 2004 

Appropriations Act by establishing fees 

for the background checks TSA is 

required to perform by Section 1012 of 

the USA PATRIOT Act and Sections 

1121–1123 of the SEA. The Fee NPRM 

would establish two fees: a user fee to 

cover the HME security threat 

assessment program and associated 

costs (Threat Assessment Fee) and a 

user fee to cover the costs of collecting 

and transmitting fingerprints and 

applicant information (Information 

Collection Fee). The amount of the 

proposed fees are $36 (Threat 

Assessment Fee) and $25–$45 

(Information Collection and 

Transmission Fee) per HME applicant. 

There will also be a $22 fee to cover 

FBI’s CHRC. 

TSA has prepared a full regulatory 

evaluation for this notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM), which is available 

for review in the docket of this matter. 

The regulatory evaluation examines the 

costs and benefits of the proposed rule 

to establish fees for security threat 

assessments that TSA is required to 

perform on individuals who apply for or 

renew an HME for a CDL. The results of 

the evaluation are summarized below. 

Costs 

The following sections summarize the 

estimated costs of the Fee NPRM. Under 

the Hazmat Program Rule, as described 

above, each State will be required to 

choose between two fingerprint and 

applicant information collection and 

transmission options. Each State will be 

required to either: (1) Collect and 

transmit the fingerprints and applicant 

information of individuals who apply 

for or renew an HME; or (2) allow an 

entity approved by TSA to complete 

these tasks. States will be required to 

notify TSA in writing of their choice 

within 30 days of the date the Hazmat 

Program Rule is published in the 

Federal Register. Because these 

different options have different cost 

impacts under the Fee NPRM—and 

because TSA cannot predict which 

option each State will choose—it is 

impossible to produce one accurate cost 

estimate for the Fee NPRM. 

For the purposes of the regulatory 

evaluation, therefore, three scenarios 

will be evaluated: (1) All States decide 

to collect and transmit the fingerprints 

and applicant information of 

individuals who apply for or renew an 

HME; (2) twenty-five States choose to 

collect and transmit all required 

fingerprints and applicant information 

to TSA, while the remainder allows an 

approved TSA agent to complete the 

work; and (3) all States decide to allow 

an approved TSA agent to collect all 

required fingerprints and applicant 

information. The second scenario 

represents TSA’s best estimate for what 

will happen once the Fee NPRM 

becomes effective and is based on 

communications with the States.

It is important to note that the figures 

detailed in this evaluation reflect only 

the estimated cost of determining, 

administering, and remitting fees 

associated with collecting and 

transmitting fingerprints and applicant 

information. A detailed discussion of 

the cost estimates can be found in the 

Regulatory Evaluation. 

(1) State Option 

If all States opt to collect fingerprints 

and applicant information to comply 

with the Hazmat Program Rule, the 

States would be required to (1) collect 

and remit to TSA the Threat Assessment 

Fee in accordance with the 

requirements of the Fee NPRM and (2) 

collect and remit to the FBI its user fee 

to perform a CHRC for matches of nongovernmental applicant names against 

certain disqualifying criminal activity 

(FBI Fee). If this alternative is adopted, 

the total ten-year cost of the Fee NPRM 

in constant 2004 U.S. Dollars is 

estimated to be $5.3 million, and $4.0 

million discounted. 

(2) Best Estimate 

In this estimate, it is assumed that 

twenty-five States will choose to comply 

with the Hazmat Program Rule by 

collecting fingerprints, fees, and 

applicant information themselves; the 

remainder of the States will allow an 

approved TSA agent to collect and 

transmit fingerprints and applicant 

information as well as all fees. Under 

these assumptions, the ten-year cost of 

the Fee NPRM is estimated to be $4.6 

million, and $3.5 million discounted. 

(3) TSA Option 

If all States opt to permit a TSA agent 

to collect and transmit fingerprints, fees, 

and applicant information, the States 

would not be required to collect and 

remit to TSA any fees under the Fee 

NPRM. Rather, a TSA agent would 

collect and remit all required 

fingerprints, information, and fees. If all 

States choose this option, the ten-year 

cost of the Fee NPRM falls to $3.9 

million, and $3.0 million discounted. 

In all of these estimates, the costs of 

the Fee NPRM are well below the 

annual $100 million threshold 

established by EO 12866 that would 

cause the Fee NPRM to be identified as 

a major rule. A further discussion of 

these costs is contained in the 

Regulatory Evaluation. 

Benefits 

There are several qualitative benefits 

realized from the implementation of the 

Fee NPRM. Primarily, the Fee NPRM 

provides a funding mechanism for the 

Hazmat Program Rule, which regulates 

the population of hazardous materials 

drivers. In essence, the Fee NPRM 

would allow TSA to spread the costs 

associated with processing threat 

assessments in an equitable manner 

among the affected parties. TSA 

determined that creating a Fee NPRM 

was the most equitable, efficient, and 

cost effective way to fund the 

aforementioned Hazmat Program Rule. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(RFA), as amended, was enacted by 

Congress to ensure that small entities 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 65343

(small businesses, small not-for-profit 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions) are not unnecessarily or 

disproportionately burdened by Federal 

regulations. The RFA requires agencies 

to review rules to determine if they have 

‘‘a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities.’’

TSA has tentatively determined that the 

proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

This proposal would affect the States 

and individuals. However, States are not 

considered ‘‘small governmental 

jurisdictions,’’ such as small towns or 

boroughs, and individuals are not 

considered ‘‘small entities’’ under the 

RFA. 

Small businesses are identified as 

small entities under the RFA. For the 

purpose of this analysis, it will be 

assumed that the total fees associated 

with obtaining an HME would not 

exceed $100. Businesses transporting 

hazardous materials often incur high 

fixed and sunk costs. The approximately 

$100 in fees, therefore, measured as a 

percentage of the total operating costs of 

a typical small business working in the 

hazardous materials transportation 

industry, would not represent a 

significant economic burden. 

TSA has tentatively determined that 

this proposed rule would not have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. TSA requests 

comment on this issue. 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 

requires Federal agencies to prepare a 

written assessment of the costs, benefits, 

and other effects of proposed or final 

rules that include a Federal mandate 

likely to result in the expenditure by 

State, local, or tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

more than $100 million in any one year 

(adjusted for inflation with base year of 

1995). Before promulgating a rule for 

which a written assessment is needed, 

section 205 of the UMRA generally 

requires TSA to identify and consider a 

reasonable number of regulatory 

alternatives and adopt the least costly, 

most cost-effective, or least burdensome 

alternative that achieves the objective of 

the rule. The provisions of section 205 

do not apply when they are inconsistent 

with applicable law. Moreover, section 

205 allows TSA to adopt an alternative 

other than the least costly, most costeffective, or least burdensome 

alternative if the agency publishes with 

the final rule an explanation of the 

reasons that alternative was not 

adopted. 

TSA has determined that this 

proposed rule would not result in the 

expenditure by State, local, or tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of more than $100 

million annually. As noted above in the 

Executive Order 12866 analysis, the 

costs of the Fee NPRM would be well 

below the $100 million annually in each 

of the three scenarios analyzed. 

International Trade Impact Assessment 

The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 

prohibits Federal agencies from 

establishing any standards or engaging 

in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Legitimate domestic objectives, such as 

safety, are not considered unnecessary 

obstacles. The statute also requires 

consideration of international standards 

and, where appropriate, that they be the 

basis for U.S. standards. 

TSA has assessed the potential effect 

of this rulemaking and has determined 

that it would have only a domestic 

impact and therefore no effect on any 

trade-sensitive activity. This proposed 

rule would impact only individuals 

applying for a State-issued HME, not 

individuals with an HME issued by 

Canada or Mexico. TSA will continue to 

consult with Canada and Mexico to 

ensure that any adverse impacts on 

trade are minimized. 

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

Executive Order 13132 requires TSA 

to develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

State and local officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies 

that have federalism implications’’ is 

defined in the Executive Order to 

include regulations that have 

‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government.’’

TSA has analyzed this proposed rule 

under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132. TSA notes that 

the requirements of this proposed rule 

are mandated by various statutes, 

including the USA PATRIOT Act, SEA, 

and section 520 of the Homeland 

Security Appropriations Act of 2004. 

Moreover, the Federal government, 

primarily through the Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration, is already 

substantially involved in establishing 

conditions for the issuance of an HME. 

Accordingly, TSA has determined that 

this action would not have a substantial 

direct effect on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, and therefore 

would not have federalism implications. 

Environmental Analysis 

TSA has reviewed this proposal for 

purposes of the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 

4321–4347) and has determined that 

this action would not have a significant 

effect on the human environment. The 

proposed rule would only implement a 

fee structure for commercial drivers 

who transport hazardous materials, and 

thus would have no environmental 

consequences. 

Energy Impact 

TSA has assessed the energy impact 

of this proposal in accordance with the 

Energy Policy and Conservation Act 

(EPCA) Public Law 94–163, as amended 

(42 U.S.C. 6362). We have determined 

that this rulemaking is not a major 

regulatory action under the provisions 

of the EPCA.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 1522

Fees, Commercial drivers license, 

Criminal history background checks, 

Explosives, Hazardous materials, Motor 

carriers, Motor vehicle carriers, Security 

measures, Security threat assessment.

The Proposed Amendments 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the Transportation Security 

Administration proposes to amend 49 

CFR Chapter XII, Subchapter B as 

follows: 

1. Add part 1522 to read as follows:

PART 1522—FEES FOR 

CREDENTIALING AND SECURITY 

THREAT ASSESSMENTS

Subpart A—Fees for Security Threat 

Assessments for Individuals 

Sec. 

1522.1 Scope and definitions. 

1522.3–1522.9 [Reserved]

Subpart B—Fees for Security Threat 

Assessments for Hazmat Drivers 

1522.11 Fee collection options. 

1522.13 Fee procedures for collection by 

States. 

1522.15 Fee procedures for collection by 

TSA agents.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114, 5103a, 40113, 

and 46105; Pub. L. 108–90, 117 Stat. 1137.

Subpart A—Fees for Security Threat 

Assessments for Individuals

§ 1522.1 Scope and definitions. 

(a) Scope. This part applies to States 

that issue a hazardous materials 

65344 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

endorsement for a commercial drivers 

license; to individuals who apply for or 

renew a hazardous materials 

endorsement for a commercial drivers 

license and must undergo a security 

threat assessment under 49 CFR part 

1572; and to entities who collect fees 

from such individuals on behalf of TSA. 

(b) Terms. As used in this part: 

Commercial drivers license (CDL) is 

used as defined in 49 CFR 383.5. 

Day means calendar day. 

Endorsement is used as defined in 49 

CFR 383.5. 

FBI Fee means the fee required for the 

cost of the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation to process fingerprint 

identification records and name checks. 

Hazardous materials means any 

material that has been designated as 

hazardous under 49 U.S.C. 5103 and is 

required to be placarded under subpart 

F of 49 CFR part 172 or any quantity of 

a material listed as a select agent or 

toxin in 42 CFR part 73. 

Hazardous materials endorsement 

(HME) means the authorization for an 

individual to transport hazardous 

materials in commerce, which must be 

issued on the individual’s commercial 

drivers license. 

Information Collection Fee means the 

fee required in this part for the cost of 

collecting and transmitting fingerprints 

and other applicant information under 

49 CFR part 1572. 

State means a State of the United 

States or the District of Columbia. 

Threat Assessment Fee means the fee 

required in this part for the cost of TSA 

adjudicating security threat 

assessments, appeals, and waivers 

under 49 CFR part 1572. 

TSA agent means an entity approved 

by TSA to collect and transmit 

fingerprints and applicant information 

in accordance with 49 CFR part 1572 

and fees in accordance with this part.

§§ 1522.3–1522.9 [Reserved]

Subpart B—Fees for Security Threat 

Assessments for Hazmat Drivers

§ 1522.11 Fee collection options. 

(a) State collection and transmission.

If a State collects fingerprints and 

applicant information under 49 CFR 

part 1572, the State must collect and 

transmit to TSA the Threat Assessment 

Fee in accordance with the 

requirements of § 1522.13. 

(b) TSA agent collection and 

transmission. If a TSA agent collects 

fingerprints and applicant information 

under 49 CFR part 1572, the agent 

must—

(1) Collect the Information Collection 

Fee, Threat Assessment Fee, and FBI 

Fee in accordance with the 

requirements of § 1522.15; 

(2) Transmit to TSA the Threat 

Assessment Fee in accordance with the 

requirements of § 1522.15 and any other 

procedures approved by TSA; and 

(3) Transmit to the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation the FBI Fee in accordance 

with procedures approved by TSA.

§ 1522.13 Fee procedures for collection by 

States. 

This section describes the procedures 

that a State that collects fingerprints and 

applicant information under 49 CFR 

part 1572, and the procedures an 

individual who applies for or renews an 

HME for a CDL in that State, must 

follow for collection and transmission of 

the Threat Assessment Fee. 

(a) Imposition of fee. (1) The following 

Threat Assessment Fee is required for 

TSA to conduct a security threat 

assessment under 49 CFR part 1572 for 

an individual who applies for or renews 

an HME: $36. 

(2) An individual who applies for a 

new or renewed HME must remit to the 

State the Threat Assessment Fee, in a 

form and manner approved by TSA and 

the State, when the individual submits 

the application for the HME to the State. 

(b) Collection of fees. (1) A State must 

collect the Threat Assessment Fee when 

an individual submits an application to 

the State for a new or renewed HME. 

(2) Once TSA receives an application 

from a State for a security threat 

assessment under 49 CFR part 1572, the 

State is liable for the Threat Assessment 

Fee. 

(3) Nothing in this subpart prevents a 

State from collecting any other fees that 

a State may impose on an individual 

who applies for or renews an HME. 

(c) Handling of fees. (1) A State must 

safeguard all Threat Assessment Fees 

from the time of collection until 

remittance to TSA. 

(2) All Threat Assessment Fees are 

held in trust by a State for the beneficial 

interest of the United States in paying 

for the costs of conducting the security 

threat assessment required by 49 U.S.C. 

5103a and 49 CFR part 1572. A State 

holds neither legal nor equitable interest 

in the Threat Assessment Fees except 

for the right to retain any accrued 

interest on the principal amounts 

collected pursuant to this section. 

(3) A State must account for Threat 

Assessment Fees separately, but may 

commingle such fees with other sources 

of revenue. 

(d) Remittance of fees. (1) TSA will 

generate and provide an invoice to a 

State on a monthly basis. The invoice 

will indicate the total fee dollars 

(number of applicants times the Threat 

Assessment Fee) that are due for the 

month. 

(2) A State must remit to TSA full 

payment for the invoice within 30 days 

after TSA sends the invoice. 

(3) TSA accepts Threat Assessment 

Fees only from a State, not from an 

individual applicant for an HME. 

(4) A State may retain any interest 

that accrues on the principal amounts 

collected between the date of collection 

and the date the Threat Assessment Fee 

is remitted to TSA in accordance with 

paragraph (d)(2) of this section. 

(5) A State may not retain any portion 

of the Threat Assessment Fee to offset 

the costs of collecting, handling, or 

remitting Threat Assessment Fees. 

(6) Threat Assessment Fees remitted 

to TSA by a State must be payable to the 

‘‘Transportation Security 

Administration’’ in United States 

currency and drawn on a United States 

bank. 

(7) Threat Assessment Fees may be 

remitted by electronic funds transfer, 

check, money order, wire transfer, or 

draft. 

(8) TSA will not issue any refunds of 

Threat Assessment Fees. 

(9) If a State does not remit the Threat 

Assessment Fees for any month, TSA 

may decline to process any HME 

applications from that State.

§ 1522.15 Fee procedures for collection by 

TSA agents. 

This section describes the procedures 

that a TSA agent that collects 

fingerprints and applicant information 

under 49 CFR part 1572 in a State, and 

the procedures an individual who 

applies for or renews an HME for a CDL 

in that State, must follow for collection 

and transmission of the Information 

Collection, Threat Assessment Fee, and 

FBI Fee. 

(a) Imposition of fees. (1) The 

following Information Collection Fee is 

required for a TSA agent to collect and 

transmit fingerprints and applicant 

information in accordance with 49 CFR 

part 1572: $25–45. 

(2) The following Threat Assessment 

Fee is required for TSA to conduct a 

security threat assessment under 49 CFR 

part 1572 for an individual who applies 

for or renews an HME: $36. 

(3) The following FBI Fee is required 

for the FBI to process fingerprint 

identification records and name checks 

required under 49 CFR part 1572: the 

fee collected by the FBI under 28 U.S.C. 

534. 

(4) An individual who applies for a 

new or renewed HME must remit to the 

TSA agent the Information Collection 

Fee, Threat Assessment Fee, and FBI 

Fee, in a form and manner approved by 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 65345

TSA, when the individual submits the 

application required under 49 CFR part 

1572. 

(b) Collection of fees. A TSA agent 

will collect the fees required under this 

section when an individual submits an 

application to the TSA agent in 

accordance with 49 CFR part 1572. 

(c) Remittance of fees. (1) Fees 

required under this section that are 

remitted to a TSA agent must be payable 

to the ‘‘Transportation Security 

Administration’’ in United States 

currency and drawn on a United States 

bank. 

(2) Fees required under this section 

may be remitted by electronic funds 

transfer, check, money order, wire 

transfer, or draft. 

(3) TSA will not issue any refunds of 

fees required under this section. 

(4) Applications submitted in 

accordance with 49 CFR part 1572 will 

be processed only upon receipt of all 

applicable fees under this section.

Issued in Arlington, VA, on November 5, 

2004. 

David M. Stone, 

Assistant Secretary.

[FR Doc. 04–25122 Filed 11–5–04; 4:02 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4910–62–P