### 70977 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 221 / Wednesday, November 16, 2011 / Notices

classified information; and for determining the eligibility for access to classified information of contractors, licensees, and grantees and their respective employees. The specific requirements necessary to protect
classified information released to private industry are set forth in DoD 5220.22–M, ‘‘National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM),’’ dated February 28, 2006. Respondents must execute DD Form 441, ‘‘Department of Defense Security Agreement,’’ which is the initial agreement between the contractor and the government regarding security requirements necessary to protect
classified information associated with the contract. This legally binding document details the responsibility of both parties and obligates the contractor to fulfill the requirements outlined in DoD 5220.22–M. The DD Form 441–1, ‘‘Appendage to Department of Defense Security Agreement,’’ is used to extend the agreement to branch offices of the contractor. The SF Form 328, ‘‘Certificate Pertaining to Foreign Interests,’’ must be submitted to provide certification regarding elements of Foreign Ownership, Control or Influence (FOCI) as stipulated in paragraph 2–302 of the NISPOM.

DSS proposes to make changes to the
DD Form 441 and SF 328. The requirement for execution of the corporate ‘‘Certificate’’ section and the use of a corporate seal is being deleted. Currently the government does not require all corporations to execute the corporate Certificate portion of the Forms. Only those corporations who are in possession of a seal were being required to execute the Certificate. Corporations that do not have a seal and other types of businesses structures such as limited liability companies, partnership and sole proprietors are only required to have the signing of the agreement witnessed. DSS proposes that a witness is sufficient for all companies whether or not they are a corporation.

Affected Public: Business, or other profit and non-profit organizations under Department of Defense Security Cognizance.

Total Annual Burden Hours: 12,246. Number of Respondents: 4,128. Responses per Respondent: 2. Average Burden Hours per Respondent: 1.5.

Frequency: One time and/or on occasion ( e.g. initial facility clearance processing, when the respondent changes: Name, organizational structure, or address; or there is a material change pertaining to its Foreign Ownership, Control or Influence, etc. ).

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Summary of Information Collection

The execution of the DD Form 441, 441–1 and SF 328 is a factor in making
a determination as to whether a contractor is eligible to have a facility security clearance. It is also a legal basis for imposing NISP security requirements on eligible contractors. These requirements are necessary in order to preserve and maintain the security of the United States through establishing standards to prevent the improper disclosure of classified
information.

Dated: November 10, 2011. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 2011–29531 Filed 11–15–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 5001–06–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE**

**Office of the Secretary**

**[Docket ID: DOD–2011–OS–0126]**

**Proposed Collection; Comment Request** 

**AGENCY :**  Defense Security Service, DoD.

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  In compliance with Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, DSS announces the proposed extension of a public information collection and seeks public comments on the provision thereof. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the information to be collected; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

**DATES :**  Consideration will be given to all comments received by January 17, 2012.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:

• Federal Rule Making Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov

Follow the instructions for submitting

comments

• Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive, 2nd Floor, East Tower, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350–3100. Instructions: All submissions received must include agency name, docket number, and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy
of comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the internet at http:// www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contract
information.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  To request more information on this proposed information collection or obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instrument, please write to: Defense Security Service, OCIO, ATTN: Mr. Prakash Kollaram, Russell-Knox Building, 27130 Telegraph Road, Quantico, VA 22134–2253, or call Defense Security Service at (571) 305–

6445.

Title and OMB Number: ‘‘Defense Security Service Industrial Security Review Data’’ and ‘‘Defense Security Service Industrial Security Facility Clearance Survey Data,’’ OMB No.

0704–0427.

Needs and Uses: The conduct of an Industrial Security Review and/or Industrial Security Facility Security Survey assists in determining whether a contractor is eligible to establish its facility security clearance and/or retain its participation in the National Industrial Security Program (NISP). It is also the basis for verifying whether contractors are appropriately implementing NISP security requirements. These requirements are necessary in order to preserve and maintain the security of the United States through establishing standards to prevent the improper disclosure of
classified information.

In accordance with Department of Defense (DoD), 5220.22–R, ‘‘Industrial Security Regulation,’’ DSS is required to
maintain a record of the results of surveys and security reviews. Documentation for each survey and/or security review will be compiled addressing areas applicable to the contractor’s security program. Portions
of the data collected will be stored in
databases. All data collected will be
handled and marked ‘‘For Official Use Only.’’

Affected Public: Businesses, universities, partnerships, or other profit and non-profit organizations under DoD security cognizance

Respondent burden: Industrial security review data:
Total annual burden hours: 41,536 hours.

Total number of respondents: 13,140.


### 70978 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 221 / Wednesday, November 16, 2011 / Notices

Possessors of classified: 4,623. Non-Possessors of classified: 8,517. Responses per respondent: 1. Average burden hours per respondent: Possessors of classified: 5.3 hours. Non-Possessors of classified: 2 hours. Frequency: Periodic ( e.g., Possessors—annually, Non-Possessors— 18 months, compliance reviews, or when directed).

Industrial security facility clearance survey data:

Total annual burden hours: 4,902 hours.

Number of respondents: 2,451. Responses per respondent: 1. Average burden hours per respondent:
2 hours.

Frequency: On occasion ( e.g., initial eligibility determination and when condition significantly changes, such as a change in ownership).

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
Summary of Information Collection

Executive Order (EO) 12829, ‘‘National Industrial Security Program (NISP),’’ January 6, 1993, as amended by EO 12885, December 14, 1993, established the NISP to safeguard federal government classified information released to contractors, licensees, and grantees of the US government. Section 202(a) of EO 12829 stipulates that the Secretary of Defense shall serve as the Executive Agent for inspecting and monitoring the contractors, licensees, and grantees who require or will require access to or who store or will store classified information; and for determining the eligibility for
access to classified information of contractors, licensees, grantees, and their respective employees. The specific requirements necessary to protect
classified information released to private industry are set forth in DoD 5220.22M, ‘‘National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM),’’ February 28, 2006. The Executive Agent has the authority to issue, after consultation with affected agencies,
standard forms or other standardization that will promote the implementation of the NISP. Contractors operating under DoD security cognizance are subject to an initial facility clearance survey and periodic government security reviews to determine their eligibility to participate in the NISP and ensure that safeguards employed are adequate for the protection of classified information.

DoD Directive 5105.42, ‘‘Defense Security Service,’’ August 30, 2010, incorporating Change 1, March 31, 2011, delineates the mission, functions, and responsibilities of DSS. DSS is an agency of the DoD under authority, direction, and control of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. DSS functions and responsibilities
include the administration and implementation of the Defense portion of the NISP pursuant to EO 12829.

DSS is the office of record for the maintenance of information pertaining to contractor facility clearance records and industrial security information regarding cleared contractors under its cognizance. To the extent possible, information required as part of the survey or security review is obtained as a result of observation by the representative of the Cognizant Security Agency or its designated Cognizant Security Office. Some of the information may be obtained based on conferences with Key Management Personnel and/or other employees of the company. The information is used to respond to all inquires regarding the facility clearance status and classified information storage capability of cleared contractors. It is
also used to assess and/or advise Government Contracting Activities regarding any particular contractor’s continued ability to protect classified
information.

Dated: November 10, 2011. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 2011–29532 Filed 11–15–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 5001–06–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE**

**Department of the Army**

**Environmental Impact Statement for Disposition of Hangars 2 and 3, Fort**  **Wainwright, AK**

**AGENCY :**  Department of the Army, DoD.

**ACTION :**  Notice of Intent.

**SUMMARY :**  The Department of the Army announces its intent to conduct public scoping under the National Environmental Policy Act to gather information to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) related to the disposition of Hangars 2 and 3 at Fort Wainwright, Alaska. Hangars 2 and 3 are contributing
elements to the Ladd Field World War II National Historic Landmark (NHL). The Department of the Army will use the analysis in the EIS to determine which alternative to implement. There may be significant impacts to historic properties.

**ADDRESSES :**  Written comments should be forwarded to Ms. Carrie McEnteer, Directorate of Public Works, Attention: IMPC–FWA–PWE (McEnteer), 1060 Gaffney Road #4500, Fort Wainwright, AK 99703–4500; fax (907) 361–9867;
email: carrie.mcenteer@us.army.mil.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Please contact Ms. Linda Douglass, Public Affairs Office (PAO), IMPC– FWA–PAO (Douglass), 1060 Gaffney Road #5900, Fort Wainwright, AK 99703–5900; telephone (907) 353–6701,
email: linda.douglass@us.army.mil.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  The decision to be made by the Army is regarding the disposition of two historic aircraft hangars located at Fort Wainwright. The EIS will assess the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts associated with various proposed facility disposition options to meet safety, funding, facilities management, land use, and cultural resources management objectives. The condition of the
facilities warrants a decision on the disposition that meets the aforementioned management objectives.

The implementation of the proposed action would determine the disposition for the historic hangars. Based on the decision, a management strategy would be developed. A range of reasonable alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, will be developed and analyzed in the EIS. Alternatives to be considered include converting both hangars to another use, demolishing both hangars, demolishing one hangar and retaining one hangar, indefinite mothballing of the buildings, and transferring facilities and management responsibility to another agency. Other reasonable alternatives raised during the scoping process and capable of meeting the project purpose and need and
criteria will be considered for
evaluation in the EIS.

Scoping and public comments: Native Americans, Alaska Natives, federal, state, and local agencies, organizations, and the public are invited to be involved in the scoping process for the preparation of this EIS by participating in scoping meetings and/or submitting written comments. The scoping process will help identify possible alternatives, potential environmental impacts, and key issues of concern to be analyzed in
the EIS. Written comments will be accepted within 60 days of publication
of the Notice of Intent in the Federal Register. Scoping meetings will be held in Fairbanks, AK. Notification of the times and locations for the scoping meetings will be locally published.

Brenda S. Bowen, Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 2011–29410 Filed 11–15–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3710–08–P**