[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 60 (Tuesday, March 29, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17951-17953]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06548]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION

Information Security Oversight Office

32 CFR Part 2001

[FDMS No. NARA-22-0002; NARA-2022-021]
RIN 3095-AC06


Classified National Security Information

AGENCY: Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO), National Archives 
and Records Administration (NARA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are revising our Classified National Security Information 
regulation to permit digital signatures that meet certain requirements 
on the Standard Form (SF) 312, which is the non-disclosure agreement 
required prior to accessing classified information. Due to agency needs 
during the COVID-19 pandemic and remote work situations, combined with 
developments in digital signatures since a regulatory prohibition on 
electronic signatures was implemented in 2010, it is both urgent and 
appropriate to make this administrative change at this time.

DATES: This rule is effective on May 9, 2022, unless we receive adverse 
comments by April 28, 2022 that warrant revising or rescinding this 
rulemaking.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 3095-AC06, by the 
following method:
    <bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Search for RIN 3095-AC06 and follow the site's instructions for 
submitting comments.
    We may publish any comments we receive without changes, including 
any personal information you include.
    During the COVID-19 pandemic and remote work situation we cannot 
accept comments my mail or delivery because we do not have staff in the 
office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly Keravuori, Regulatory and 
External Policy Program Manager, by email at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8efcebe9fbe2effae7e1e0d1ede1e3e3ebe0fafdcee0effcefa0e9e1f8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5c2e393b29303d28353332033f3331313932282f1c323d2e3d723b332a">[email protected]</span></a>, or by telephone at 301.837.3151.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: These regulations were last revised in 2010. 
At that time, these regulations included a prohibition against signing 
the Standard Form (SF) 312 electronically, due to concerns about 
integrity and legal enforceability of any form of electronic signature 
(e-signature) at the time. In the decade-plus since then, encryption 
and other measures for e-signatures have advanced and they are now 
regularly encouraged or required and deemed legally enforceable. In 
addition, Federal agencies are required to digitize services and forms 
and accelerate the use of e-signatures as much as possible (see, e.g., 
2018 21st Century Integrated Digital Experience Act (21st Century 
IDEA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 note).
    Since the COVID-19 pandemic began in March 2020, numerous Federal 
agencies have had to engage in remote work to varying degrees and have 
had difficulty bringing new workers onboard who require access to 
classified information, due to the requirement for handwritten 
signatures on the SF 312. It has been placing employees at risk of 
spreading the virus, as well as creating logistical and other 
difficulties. Multiple agencies have been consistently requesting the 
ability to allow e-signatures as a result, and the need became critical 
and urgent once the COVID-19 pandemic extended much longer than 
originally anticipated.
    The advances in technical ability to ensure valid e-signatures, and 
legal acceptance of such signatures, is clearly the way of the future 
and necessary to support a modernized classified national security 
information system. However, the timing to make this change is more 
urgent now because of COVID-19 related health risks.
    Under laws such as the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA), 
44 U.S.C. 3504 note, the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA), a 
model act since adopted by 47 states and the District of Columbia (the 
remaining three states have comparable laws), and the Electronic 
Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (ESIGN), 15 U.S.C. 7001, 
et seq., an e-signature has the same legal weight as a handwritten 
signature and cannot be considered invalid simply due to being 
electronic. The laws establish criteria for valid e-signatures, along 
the following lines: Intent to sign, consent to do business 
electronically, association of the signature with the record, 
attribution to the person signing, and a record of the digital 
transactions. The United States practices an open-technology approach, 
meaning there's no law requiring use of a specific signing technology 
for an e-signature to be legally binding, as long as it meets the 
criteria.
    However, for the purpose of e-signatures on the SF 312, ISOO has 
established certain requirements agencies must meet if they wish to 
allow such signatures. We require that agencies use digital signatures 
(rather than other forms of e-signature) on the SF 312 because digital 
signatures provide the requisite level of security and authenticity 
appropriate for these agreements. Digital signatures are a specific 
signature technology type of e-signature that allows users to sign 
documents and authenticate the signer. Digital signatures are based on 
a standard, accepted format, called public key infrastructure (PKI), to 
provide the highest levels of security and universal acceptance through 
use of a mathematical algorithm and other features. The mathematical 
algorithm acts like a cipher and encrypts the data matching the signed 
document. The resulting encrypted data is the digital signature, which 
is also marked with the

[[Page 17952]]

time the document was signed and is invalidated if the document is 
changed after signing. To protect the integrity of the signature, PKI 
also includes other requirements, including a reliable certificate 
authority (CA) that can ensure key security and provide necessary 
digital certificates.
    The PKI and CA combination used for digital signatures ensures 
authentication (i.e., that the digital signature was made by the person 
it claims to have been made by); consent (i.e., that the person who 
digitally signed the form meant to do so); and integrity (i.e., that 
the SF 312 has not changed since the signature was made). As a result, 
we require agencies to use digital signatures if they allow e-
signatures on their SF 312s. Digital signatures created using Federal 
Government personal identity verification (PIV) cards or common access 
cards (CACs) require the card holder to enter their personal 
identification number (PIN), and meet the requirements outlined above, 
so it is possible for Federal employees and contractors with such cards 
to digitally sign the SF 312 using these cards. Agencies may choose to 
use other digital signature providers than the PIV or CAC cards, as 
long as they meet the same requirements.
    The existing SF 312 has been approved by the General Services 
Administration (GSA) as a standard form. In conjunction with this 
rulemaking action, we are working with the appropriate agencies to 
revise the form to make it electronically fillable and to allow digital 
signatures.

Regulatory Analysis

Administrative Procedure

    Under the Administrative Procedure Act, an agency may waive the 
normal notice and comment procedures if the action is a rule of agency 
organization, procedure, or practice. See 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A). Since 
this rule modifies administrative procedures and practice regarding how 
agencies may allow a form to be signed and maintained, notice and 
comment are not necessary.

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and Executive 
Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulation Review

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has reviewed this 
rulemaking and determined it is not ``significant'' under section 3(f) 
of Executive Order 12866. It is not significant because it is a rule of 
agency procedure and practice, describing our procedures for agencies 
to handle and process the Standard Form (SF) 312, and we do not 
anticipate it having an economic impact on the public. It will help 
ensure easier onboarding and access to classified information for 
employees and contractors, safeguard employees and others from risks of 
COVID infection, reduce logistical complications and difficulties 
during the pandemic and thereafter, and update the form's procedures 
for easier use with current technological developments.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.)

    This review requires an agency to prepare an initial regulatory 
flexibility analysis and publish it when the agency publishes the rule. 
This requirement does not apply if the agency certifies that the 
rulemaking will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities (5 U.S.C. 603). We certify, 
after review and analysis, that this rulemaking will not have a 
significant adverse economic impact on small entities.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.)

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) 
requires that agencies consider the impact of paperwork and other 
information collection burdens imposed on the public and, under the 
provisions of PRA section 3507(d), obtain approval from OMB for each 
collection of information we conduct, sponsor, or require through 
regulations. The existing SF 312 is such an information collection and 
has already been approved by OMB/GSA. This rulemaking does not impose 
additional information collection requirements on the public.

Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 requires agencies to ensure state and local 
officials have the opportunity for meaningful and timely input when 
developing regulatory policies that may have a substantial, direct 
effect on the states, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and the states, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. If the effects 
of the rule on state and local governments are sufficiently 
substantial, the agency must prepare a Federal assessment to assist 
senior policy makers. This rulemaking will not have any effects on 
state and local governments within the meaning of the E.O. Therefore, 
no federalism assessment is required.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (Sec. 202, Pub. L. 104-4; 2 U.S.C. 1532)

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act requires that agencies determine 
whether any Federal mandate in the rulemaking may result in state, 
local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector, 
expending $100 million in any one year. This rule does not contain a 
Federal mandate that may result in such an expenditure.

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 2001

    Archives and records, Records disposition, Records management, 
Records schedules, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Scheduling 
records.

    For the reasons stated, NARA amends 32 CFR part 2001 as follows:

PART 2001--CLASSIFIED NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION

0
1. The authority citation for part 2001 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Sections 5.1(a) and (b), E.O. 13526, (75 FR 707, 
January 5, 2010).


0
2. Amend Sec.  2001.80 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (d)(2)(ii);
0
b. In paragraph (d)(2)(v), adding a sentence to the end of the 
paragraph; and
0
c. In paragraph (d)(2)(vii), adding the parenthetical ``(either in 
paper form or electronic form)'' to the second sentence, in between the 
words ``The original'' and ``, or a legally enforceable facsimile''.
    The revision and addition read as follows:


Sec.  2001.80   Prescribed standard forms.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) The SF 312 may be filled out electronically or by hand, then 
must be signed. It may be signed by hand and scanned, if the 
implementing agency permits and the scanned version is done in a way 
that constitutes a legally enforceable facsimile. Alternatively, the 
form may be digitally signed if the implementing agency permits, and if 
the digital signature mechanism employs public key cryptography in a 
way that meaningfully guarantees authenticity (i.e., that the digital 
signature was made by the person it claims to have been made by); 
consent (i.e., that the person who digitally signed the form meant to 
do so); and integrity (i.e., that the SF 312 has not changed since the 
signature was made). Digital signatures created using Personal Identity 
Verification (PIV) cards or common access cards (CACs) issued by the 
U.S. Government that are

[[Page 17953]]

compliant with Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 (HSPD-12), 
or its successor, meet the requirements of this paragraph (d)(2)(ii). 
They include public key infrastructure (PKI), digital signature 
certificates issued by a certificate authority (CA), and a PIN the 
signer must enter in order to digitally sign. Agencies may choose to 
use other digital signature mechanisms than the PIV or CAC cards, as 
long as they meet the requirements of this paragraph (d)(2)(ii). The 
form may not be signed using other forms of electronic signature (e-
signature), such as typing ``/s/[first and last name]'' or attaching an 
image of a handwritten signature.
* * * * *
    (v) * * * If the SF 312 is digitally signed, it does not require a 
witness to observe and verify the digital signature, and therefore also 
does not require an official to subsequently accept the signature.
* * * * *

David S. Ferriero,
Archivist of the United States.
[FR Doc. 2022-06548 Filed 3-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7515-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>