50980 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

Conformance With Statutory and 

Regulatory Authorities 

National Environmental Policy Act 

A Final Environmental Impact 

Statement (FEIS) was published on 

February 28, 1992, and a Record of 

Decision on Subsistence Management 

for Federal Public Lands in Alaska 

(ROD) was signed April 6, 1992. The 

final rule for Subsistence Management 

Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska, 

Subparts A, B, and C (57 FR 22940, 

published May 29, 1992), implemented 

the Federal Subsistence Management 

Program and included a framework for 

an annual cycle for subsistence hunting 

and fishing regulations. A final rule that 

redefined the jurisdiction of the Federal 

Subsistence Management Program to 

include waters subject to the 

subsistence priority was published on 

January 8, 1999 (64 FR 1276.) 

Section 810 of ANILCA 

The intent of all Federal subsistence 

regulations is to accord subsistence uses 

of fish and wildlife on public lands a 

priority over the taking of fish and 

wildlife on such lands for other 

purposes, unless restriction is necessary 

to conserve healthy fish and wildlife 

populations. A Section 810 analysis was 

completed as part of the FEIS process. 

The final Section 810 analysis 

determination appeared in the April 6, 

1992, ROD, which concluded that the 

Federal Subsistence Management 

Program, under Alternative IV with an 

annual process for setting hunting and 

fishing regulations, may have some local 

impacts on subsistence uses, but the 

program is not likely to significantly 

restrict subsistence uses. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The adjustment and emergency 

closures do not contain information 

collection requirements subject to Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) 

approval under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995. 

Other Requirements 

The adjustments have been exempted 

from OMB review under Executive 

Order 12866. 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires 

preparation of flexibility analyses for 

rules that will have a significant effect 

on a substantial number of small 

entities, which include small 

businesses, organizations, or 

governmental jurisdictions. The exact 

number of businesses and the amount of 

trade that will result from this Federal 

land-related activity is unknown. The 

aggregate effect is an insignificant 

economic effect (both positive and 

negative) on a small number of small 

entities supporting subsistence 

activities, such as sporting goods 

dealers. The number of small entities 

affected is unknown; however, the 

effects will be seasonally and 

geographically limited in nature and 

will likely not be significant. The 

Departments certify that the adjustments 

will not have a significant economic 

effect on a substantial number of small 

entities within the meaning of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. Under the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), this 

rule is not a major rule. It does not have 

an effect on the economy of $100 

million or more, will not cause a major 

increase in costs or prices for 

consumers, and does not have 

significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or the ability 

of U.S.-based enterprises to compete 

with foreign-based enterprises. 

Title VIII of ANILCA requires the 

Secretaries to administer a subsistence 

preference on public lands. The scope of 

this program is limited by definition to 

certain public lands. Likewise, the 

adjustments have no potential takings of 

private property implications as defined 

by Executive Order 12630. 

The Service has determined and 

certifies pursuant to the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et 

seq., that the adjustments will not 

impose a cost of $100 million or more 

in any given year on local or State 

governments or private entities. The 

implementation is by Federal agencies, 

and no cost is involved to any State or 

local entities or Tribal governments. 

The Service has determined that the 

adjustments meet the applicable 

standards provided in Sections 3(a) and 

3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, 

regarding civil justice reform. 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13132, the adjustments do not have 

sufficient federalism implications to 

warrant the preparation of a Federalism 

Assessment. Title VIII of ANILCA 

precludes the State from exercising 

subsistence management authority over 

fish and wildlife resources on Federal 

lands. Cooperative salmon run 

assessment efforts with ADF&G will 

continue. 

In accordance with the President’s 

memorandum of April 29, 1994, 

‘‘Government-to-Government Relations 

with Native American Tribal 

Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive 

Order 13175, and 512 DM 2, we have 

evaluated possible effects on Federally 

recognized Indian tribes and have 

determined that there are no effects. The 

Bureau of Indian Affairs is a 

participating agency in this rulemaking. 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

Executive Order 13211 on regulations 

that significantly affect energy supply, 

distribution, or use. This Executive 

Order requires agencies to prepare 

Statements of Energy Effects when 

undertaking certain actions. As these 

actions are not expected to significantly 

affect energy supply, distribution, or 

use, they are not significant energy 

actions and no Statement of Energy 

Effects is required. 

Drafting Information 

Bill Knauer drafted this document 

under the guidance of Thomas H. Boyd, 

of the Office of Subsistence 

Management, Alaska Regional Office, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Anchorage, Alaska. Taylor Brelsford, 

Alaska State Office, Bureau of Land 

Management; Greg Bos, Alaska Regional 

Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 

Sandy Rabinowitch, Alaska Regional 

Office, National Park Service; Warren 

Eastland, Alaska Regional Office, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs; and Steve 

Kessler, USDA-Forest Service, provided 

additional guidance. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 3, 472, 551, 668dd, 

3101–3126; 18 U.S.C. 3551–3586; 43 U.S.C. 

1733. 

Dated: August 4, 2005. 

Thomas H. Boyd, 

Acting Chair, Federal Subsistence Board. 

Dated: August 4, 2005. 

Steve Kessler, 

Subsistence Program Leader, USDA-Forest 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–17075 Filed 8–26–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–P; 4310–55–P 

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS 

ADMINISTRATION 

36 CFR Part 1228 

RIN 3095–AB31 

Records Center Facility Standards 

AGENCY: National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule modifies 

NARA facility standards for records 

storage facilities that house Federal 

records to clarify requirements relating 

to design or certification of multiple 

story facilities and fire detection and 

protection systems; to revise certain 

requirements relating to fire-ratings of 

roofs, building columns, and fire barrier 

walls; and to clarify the application of 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 50981 

other requirements. The rule addresses 

records center industry concerns 

identified in the 2003 Report to 

Congress on Costs and Benefits of 

Federal Regulations. This rule affects 

commercial records storage facilities 

that store Federal records and applies to 

all agencies, including NARA, that 

establish and operate records centers, 

and to agencies that contract for the 

services of commercial records storage 

facilities. 

DATES: This rule is effective September 

28, 2005. The incorporation by reference 

of certain publications in this rule is 

approved by the Director of the Federal 

Register as of September 28, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nancy Allard at telephone number 301–

837–1477, or fax number 301–837–0319. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NARA 

published a proposed rule on September 

7, 2004 (69 FR 54091) outlining 

proposed changes to our regulations 

governing facilities that store Federal 

records (records storage facilities). We 

received comments from eight Federal 

agencies, seven private sector records 

storage facilities, Professional Records 

and Information Services Management 

(PRISM) International (a records center 

industry association), ARMA 

International (a professional 

organization for persons in the field of 

records and information management), 

the International Code Council (an 

association dedicated to building 

safety), and 11 individuals. Fourteen 

respondents generally supported the 

proposed rule or had no comments; the 

remaining respondents had concerns 

with one or more of the proposed 

provisions. A detailed discussion of the 

substantive comments follows. 

As we discussed extensively in the 

1999 rulemaking and restated in the 

2004 proposed rule, Federal records 

provide essential documentation of the 

Federal Government’s policies and 

transactions and protect rights of 

individuals. The Government has an 

obligation to protect and preserve these 

records for their entire retention period, 

even if that retention period is only a 

few years, as is the case with IRS 

income tax returns or invoice payments. 

NARA believes that records storage 

facilities should be structurally sound, 

protect against unauthorized access, and 

protect against fire and water damage to 

the records, whether the records are 

temporary or permanent. This 

rulemaking continues to reflect that 

belief. 

Discussion of Comments 

Section 1228.224 (Incorporation by 

Reference) 

We received two comments on this 

section, which was modified in the 

proposed rule to add new standards 

proposed in that rulemaking. One 

individual commented that NARA 

should update paragraph (c) to reflect 

the latest editions of all of the National 

Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 

standards cited in the regulation. We 

did not adopt this comment. The 

International Code Council (ICC) ICC 

requested that NARA modify the 

proposed rule to adopt by reference the 

2003 edition of six ICC Codes in lieu of 

the NFPA Fuel Code and Uniform 

Mechanical Code. As we explain 

elsewhere in this Supplementary 

Information in response to another ICC 

comment, all jurisdictions have not 

adopted the ICC Codes in lieu of other 

voluntary consensus standards. 

Moreover, the NFPA Fuel Code and 

Uniform Mechanical Code are American 

National Standards Institute (ANSI) 

approved standards, which reflect that 

ANSI principles of openness and due 

process have been followed and that a 

consensus of all interested stakeholder 

groups has been reached in 

development of the standards. Not all 

ICC Codes have that designation. 

Therefore, we have not adopted this ICC 

comment. 

Section 1228.226 (Definitions) 

Two commenters objected to the 

proposed change to the definition of 

records storage area. One individual 

stated that our replacement of the term 

‘‘fire wall’’ with the term ‘‘fire barrier 

wall’’ severely lessens the level of 

protection provided. The ICC 

commented that there is a difference in 

the definitions of ‘‘firewall’’ and ‘‘fire 

barrier wall’’ and that NARA should 

delete the definition of ‘‘fire barrier 

wall.’’ ICC further stated that the 

problem ICC identified would be 

resolved by the adoption of the IBC, ICC 

International Fire Code (IFC) and ICC 

Existing Buildings Code (IEBC) as a 

minimum baseline. We did not accept 

these comments. When NARA 

published the original 1999 final rule, 

we changed ‘‘fire wall’’ to ‘‘fire barrier 

wall’’ throughout the regulation. At that 

time, we inadvertently overlooked the 

reference to ‘‘fire wall’’ in the definition 

of records storage area. This change to 

the definition brings it into conformance 

with the intent of the regulation. 

PRISM requested clarification of the 

definition of auxiliary space, which was 

not modified in the proposed rule. We 

confirm that NARA does not consider 

loading docks (including the adjacent 

document processing areas) as 

‘‘auxiliary spaces,’’ and, therefore, this 

regulation does not require the 

construction of fire barrier walls 

between such areas and records storage 

areas. 

Section 1228.228(a) (Roof 

Requirement) 

Two commenters opposed changing 

§ 1228.228(a) to allow roof elements to 

be constructed with combustible 

materials if installed in accordance with 

local building codes and if roof 

elements are protected by a properly 

installed, properly maintained 

automatic sprinkler system. One 

objector stated that if the sprinkler 

system is tied to the roof, the loss of the 

roof would render the sprinkler system 

useless. The other objector stated that 

the National Fire Protection Association 

(NFPA) 232 (2000 ed.), Standard for the 

Protection of Records, required a noncombustible roof because of a higher 

level of risk of involvement of the roof 

in fire in these types of facilities. 

PRISM, in supporting the provision 

stated that no basis for concluding that 

a wood roof has less structural integrity 

than one with steel members, noting 

that steel (a noncombustible product) 

would begin to fail at 1000° F. NARA’s 

fire tests have shown that in an 

uncontrolled fire the temperature at the 

roof level can quickly exceed 1000° F. 

We also note that under the 1999 rule, 

existing facilities may already obtain a 

waiver to have wood roof construction 

under the conditions that the proposed 

rule would extend to all facilities. 

In this final rule, we have modified 

§ 1228.228(a) slightly. To improve 

clarity, we have separated the 

provisions of the paragraph into 

subparagraphs. Paragraph (a) 

introductory text states the basic 

requirement for use of non-combustible 

materials. Paragraph (a)(1) states the 

conditions under which roof elements 

constructed with combustible materials 

are allowed, and we have added a 

reference to the appropriate NFPA 

standard for sprinkler systems (NFPA 

13, Installation of Sprinkler Systems, 

2002 edition) that must be followed. 

Paragraph (a)(2) restates the steps to be 

taken to request a waiver for an existing 

records storage facility with combustible 

building elements other than the roof to 

continue to operate until October 1, 

2009. 

Section 1228.228(b) (Certification—

Multi-Story Facilities) 

There were two comments that 

specifically addressed the proposed 

change to this provision. One comment 

50982 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

suggested that we define ‘‘certify’’ in the 

definitions (§ 1228.226) and not modify 

the language here or in later sections. 

The other comment objected to the 

change, misunderstanding the change to 

mean that NARA would only be 

requiring the fire protection engineer 

and civil/structural engineer to state 

whether the facility meets the local 

building code. A third comment, from 

ARMA International, noted that the role 

of the professional engineer in the 

inspection of such facilities is a key to 

the protection of records and that 

relying on local building codes will 

inevitably result in great variances in 

the levels of protection the records 

actually receive. 

We did not make any changes to this 

provision. The nature of the activity 

required under this provision is the 

same as previously required ‘‘ reviews 

by a licensed fire protection engineer 

(FPE) and licensed civil/structural 

engineer that the fire resistance of 

separating floors is at least 4 hours and 

that there are no obvious structural 

weaknesses that would indicate a high 

potential for structural catastrophic 

collapse under fire conditions. Our 

change to paragraph (b) more accurately 

reflects our intention that the 

engineer(s) provide a professional 

opinion under seal. We did not accept 

the suggestion to define ‘‘certify’’ in 

§ 1228.226 because we believe it is 

better to describe the requirement 

accurately where it occurs than to 

define a term that is open to 

misinterpretation and then use that term 

in the requirements. 

Section 1228.228(d) (Building Code 

Protection Against Natural Disaster) 

The proposed rule modified 

§ 1228.228(d), which requires designing 

the records center facility to provide 

protection from building collapse or 

failure of essential equipment from 

earthquake hazards, tornadoes, 

hurricanes and other potential natural 

disasters. The 1999 rule only cited 

regional building codes. At the 

suggestion of PRISM, we added local or 

state building codes, since these codes 

may address a specific local common 

natural disaster that the regional code 

does not. 

We received three comments on this 

provision. One Federal agency 

commented that ‘‘* * * ordinarily, 

Federal agencies are exempt from such 

requirements [to meet local and state 

building and fire codes] although they 

usually meet or exceed such codes. It is 

difficult to prescribe rules when there 

are so many state and local variances 

and I recommend that the Federal 

exemption continue.’’ We did not adopt 

this comment. Although buildings built 

on Federal property are exempt from 

state and local building codes, GSA’s 

policy, as articulated in P100, The 

Facilities Standards for the Public 

Buildings Service, is to comply with 

state and local building codes to the 

maximum extent practicable. Moreover, 

the NARA standards apply to 

commercial facilities that agencies use 

for the storage of their records. 

The International Code Council (ICC) 

stated that the ICC codes have replaced 

the three regional model codes that were 

in existence in 1999 when the original 

NARA rule was issued. ICC urged that 

NARA replace references to regional, 

state and local codes with reference to 

the ICC model codes. We have added a 

reference to the ICC model (i.e., 

national) code, but not removed the 

references to the other codes. Newly 

adopted building codes apply to new 

construction and renovation that take 

place after the new code is adopted. 

This regulation covers both existing and 

new facilities that are covered by a 

variety of editions of codes. Thus, it 

would not be appropriate to cite only 

the ICC codes. 

The third commenter, PRISM, 

believes that the balance struck by 

NARA will not create undue confusion, 

and represents a significantly better 

balance than the previous rule. 

Section 1228.228(i) (Storage Shelving) 

The proposed rule added racking 

systems as an acceptable form of records 

storage shelving and added state and 

local building code requirements for 

seismic bracing. We received two 

comments on this provision. One 

individual requested that we modify the 

text to prohibit double or triple stacking 

boxes on the individual shelves. We did 

not adopt this comment. The basic 

requirement in the proposed revision to 

paragraph (i)(2) provides adequate 

protection. If a facility’s practice is to 

double or triple stack boxes of records 

on a shelf, the shelf would have to be 

rated for 100 or 150 pounds, 

respectively. NARA is setting 

performance requirements, not 

specifying how a storage facility must 

shelve its records. 

The other commenter expressed a 

concern with racking systems, which 

are designed to go to heights in excess 

of 50 feet, and recommended the 

requirement for seismic bracing should 

extended to racking, if a facility desires 

to use this type of shelving. The 

commenter noted that when these large 

volumes of records are exposed to 

water, either during a fire or in the event 

of an accidental discharge of a sprinkler 

system, the weight bearing on the 

racking system is severe. We note that 

this requirement already existed in the 

proposed rule and have retained it in 

this final rule. 

Section 1228.228(n)(3) (Requirement 

for Backup Power Source) 

We received a comment from ICC on 

§ 1228.228(n)(3), which was not 

proposed for revision. ICC stated that 

the provision, as currently wording, is 

not mandatory. If a backup power 

source is determined necessary, NARA 

should require one. We did not modify 

this section as the comment was out of 

scope. 

Section 1228.228(n)(4) (Requirement 

for Positive Air Pressure) 

In the 1999 rule, § 1228.228(n)(4) 

required that all new facilities must be 

kept under positive air pressure and 

loading docks must have an air supply 

and exhaust system that is separate from 

the remainder of the facility. The 

proposed rule would limit this 

provision to new facilities that store 

permanent Federal records. (It is not 

practicable to impose this retroactively 

on existing facilities.) We received two 

comments opposing the proposed 

change and one comment supporting 

the change. One non-Federal records 

manager and one Federal agency 

opposed this provision, noting that 

long-term temporary records would be 

adversely affected. The records manager 

proposed that it be required for facilities 

storing 20-year records. PRISM 

supported the change, stating that 

literature shows that other factors, such 

as the acid in the paper and exposure to 

UV light prior to being placed in 

storage, are the principal causes of 

records degradation. 

This final rule retains the proposed 

rule language limiting the provision to 

new facilities that store permanent 

records. While there may be a potential 

for degradation of records from 

exposure to exhaust fumes (the reason 

for positive air pressure), such exposure 

is not constant. Paper-based records are 

further protected from direct exposure 

by their enclosure in folders within 

closed boxes. 

Section 1228.230(a) (Certification—

Fire Detection and Protection Systems) 

We received one comment from an 

individual objecting to the change in 

this paragraph. The commenter stated 

that it is imperative that the design and 

protection provided be reviewed and 

certified by a professional whose 

primary duties are related to the 

adequate protection of a facility from 

the hazards of a fire. Having the 

individual who designed and/or 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 50983 

installed the system stating it is 

adequate is akin to ‘‘having the fox 

guarding the henhouse.’’

As we explained in the preamble to 

the proposed rule, the change made in 

this provision was to substitute for the 

word ‘‘certify’’ specific information that 

the licensed FPE must provide in the 

report furnished under seal. That 

information will be sufficient for NARA 

to evaluate whether the facility 

complies with the requirements in 

§ 1228.230. 

Section 1228.230(b) (Interior Walls) 

We received three comments from 

individuals opposing the proposed 

change to § 1228.230(b) to require that 

interior walls separating records storage 

areas from each other and from other 

storage areas in the building be at least 

3-hour fire resistant, instead of requiring 

4-hour fire barrier walls. We agree that 

there is a substantial difference in level 

of protection from fire between a 3-hour 

and 4-hour fire barrier wall; however, 

there is also a substantial difference in 

cost for records center owners. The data 

provided by PRISM stated that the cost 

of a 3-hour wall at 40 feet (the height of 

the typical commercial records center) 

is about $560 per linear foot; a 4-hour 

wall at 40 feet is $865 per linear foot. 

We have adopted the proposed rule 

wording in this final rule because we 

believe that the significant difference in 

the cost of a 4-hour wall does not justify 

the enhanced records protection. 

Additionally, the ICC commented that 

because ICC codes define, refer to and 

contain provisions for fire walls and fire 

barriers, a reference to the ICC codes 

would address the safety issue for 

NARA and the cost issue for the storage 

industry while maintaining consistency 

with state and local codes. We 

respectfully disagree with this 

comment. ICC did not identify a specific 

ICC code that addresses records centers. 

In general, the fire-safety components of 

building codes are designed to protect 

the life and safety of occupants, mitigate 

against the spread of a fire to adjacent 

structures, and to protect fire fighters, 

not to limit the loss of valuable 

contents. NFPA 232 and NARA’s 

regulation supplement the building 

codes to provide a safety level for the 

items stored. 

Section 1228.230(b) (Compartment 

Size) 

In the preamble to the proposed rule, 

NARA noted that we did not modify the 

requirement that no more than 250,000 

cubic feet of Federal records be stored 

in a single records storage area. ARMA 

commented that: 

‘‘Although the proposed rule maintains the 

maximum volume of 250,000 cu. ft. of 

Federal records in a single compartment, it 

says nothing about the total capacity of the 

compartment. This has the impact of 

allowing virtually unlimited volumes of 

records to be stored in a single compartment, 

as long as no more than 250,000 cu. ft. of 

Federal records are stored there. While this 

limits the exposure of the Federal records, it 

could easily put other consumers at 

considerably more potential exposure * * * 

‘‘Before the rule is finalized, consideration 

should be given to using NFPA 13 

Installation of Sprinkler Systems as a basis 

for calculating the storage capacity of a 

facility. NFPA 13 indicates that 40,000 sq. ft. 

is the maximum area covered by one 

sprinkler system. If one takes this as the 

maximum size of a compartment and uses 

the commercial industry standard of storage 

capacity within square footage, the result is 

approximately 1 million cubic feet of storage 

under control of one sprinkler system. This 

could be considered as the basis for 

providing some limitation on the loss of 

records. Such a limitation provides a 

secondary line of defense if a sprinkler 

system fails or is compromised.’’

NARA appreciates ARMA’s concern 

for the holdings of other organizations, 

but our authority is limited to Federal 

records. 

Section 1228.230(e) (Fire Resistive 

Rating of Roof) 

We received one comment supporting 

and three comments opposing the 

proposed change to paragraph (e). This 

change deletes the requirement that new 

facilities must have a roof with a 

maximum fire-resistive rating of one 

hour and to allow protection of the roof 

by an automatic sprinkler system 

designed, installed, and maintained in 

accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for 

the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, as 

an alternative to the requirement for a 

minimum fire resistive rating of 1⁄2 hour. 

PRISM noted that the change brings 

the provision in line with the modern 

building codes. One commenter raised a 

general objection that ‘‘it would be a 

risk to both our intellectual heritage and 

to those who live near records centers 

to weaken the standards for fireretardance.’’ Another individual asked 

whether NARA researched NFPA 13 to 

make certain that by allowing roofs with 

lower fire-resistive ratings, NFPA 13 

was not itself rendered non-viable, as it 

may well have depended on a certain 

level of fire resistance for the roof. A 

third individual stated that there is little 

if any logic behind lowering the fireresistive rating of the roof from 1 hour 

to 1⁄2 hour. 

This final rule retains the proposed 

rule language. Both the 1999 rule and 

this revision require a minimum fireresistive rating of 1⁄2 hour for roofs for 

existing and new facilities. The revision 

removes a requirement for a maximum 

fire resistive rating of 1 hour for new 

facilities. We note that NFPA 13, 

Installation of Sprinkler Systems, 2002 

edition, provides for sprinkler systems 

to protect wood roofs. 

Section 1228.230(i) (Building 

Columns) 

We received three comments 

opposing, for a variety of reasons, the 

proposed change in the fire resistance 

requirement for building columns in 

records storage areas from 2 hours for 

existing facilities and 4 hours for new 

facilities to 1 hour or protected in 

accordance with NFPA 13 for all 

facilities. One comment noted that the 

NARA proposal was less stringent than 

NFPA 232–2000; another asked about 

the value of the columns having an even 

lower fire-resistance rating than the 

walls; and the third suggested that the 

change would result in a significant 

lessening of the protection measures for 

storage of records with no additional 

benefit. 

This final rule retains the proposed 

rule language. We considered both the 

commenters’ concerns and industry 

issues with impact of the provision on 

the records center industry, most of 

which are small businesses. As we 

noted in the preamble to the proposed 

rule, PRISM claimed that the 1999 rule 

imposes insurmountable costs on most 

commercial storage facilities, which, in 

general, use columns (including 

exposed steel) that are not fire rated. We 

have concluded, for the reasons stated 

in the proposed rule at 69 FR 54093, 

that it is appropriate to proceed with the 

change. 

Section 1228.230(l) (Use of Open 

Flame Equipment) 

We received four comments opposing 

the proposal to allow open flame oil and 

gas unit heaters or equipment in storage 

areas if they are installed and used in 

accordance with NFPA 54, National 

Fuel Gas Code and the International 

Association of Plumbing and 

Mechanical Officials (IAPMO) Uniform 

Mechanical Code. Three of the 

comments expressed fire-safety 

concerns; one of these comments noted 

a higher risk to the records in high 

seismic risk zones where a fuel line 

might rupture. Installation in 

accordance with the applicable code 

will ensure a safe installation. Seismic 

safety requirements are met by 

designing the equipment and 

installation in accordance with the 

appropriate seismic zones as called for 

in local building codes, which dictate 

50984 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

design requirements for attachment and 

bracing of piping. 

ICC commented that the National Fuel 

Gas Code and the Uniform Mechanical 

Code both cover gas-heating equipment 

and may not have the same 

requirements. To require compliance 

with both documents could create a 

conflict for the designer, contractor and 

building owner. In addition, state and 

local codes would also address such 

equipment; as do two ICC codes. ICC 

also suggested that the requirements for 

positive air pressure and environmental 

controls conflict with this provision, 

rendering it moot. ICC believes that 

reliance on the ICC codes would 

eliminate such conflicts and provide a 

baseline upon which NARA could 

address any unique issues associated 

with the control of the environment in 

which Federal records are stored. We 

did not accept these comments. Both the 

National Fuel Gas Code and the 

Uniform Mechanical Code are approved 

American National Standards (ANSI 

standards), while the two ICC codes 

proposed as alternatives are not. 

Section 1228.232 (Environmental 

Controls) 

The proposed rule modified 

paragraphs (b) on non-textual temporary 

records and (c) on permanent and 

certain other paper-based records to 

revise the effective date for new records 

centers to be the effective date of this 

final rule instead of January 3, 2000, the 

effective date set by the 1999 rule. We 

did not propose to change the substance 

of the requirements themselves. 

We received one comment from an 

agency on paragraph (b) and a comment 

from the ICC on paragraph (c). The 

agency representative stated that the 

best environment for long term storage 

of paper records is not the same as the 

comfort requirements for office space, 

and recommended revising the wording 

‘‘ * * * equivalent to that required for 

office space’’ to read ‘‘ * * * that will 

meet the long-term preservation 

requirements of paper-based permanent 

records.’’ We did not accept this 

comment. We decided as part of the 

1999 rulemaking that it is not 

reasonable to require more stringent 

environmental conditions for paper 

records stored off-site than what they 

would have in office space. 

The ICC commented that the 

American Society of Heating, 

Refrigerating and Air Conditioning 

Engineers (ASHRE) standards 

referenced in paragraph (c) had been 

replaced by more recent editions, and 

suggested that NARA either reference 

the newer editions or reference 

comparable ICC codes. We declined to 

act on this comment at this final rule 

stage. Except for extreme circumstances, 

new versions are not retroactive to 

existing buildings (until they are 

substantially modified). Based on the 

PRISM and small business records 

center operators’ comments, most 

commercial records centers are existing 

buildings. 

Section 1228.236 (Waivers) 

The proposed rule set forth text to 

amend paragraph (a)(2) to update the 

effective date of new standards that 

previously compliant agency records 

centers must meet. That effective date is 

the effective date of this final rule. One 

commenter suggested that this action 

was creating an unintended loophole for 

commercial records centers that fell out 

of compliance with the NARA standards 

after January 2, 2000. The commenter 

misinterpreted the paragraph, which 

applies only to records centers owned or 

operated by Federal agencies. We have 

retained this change in the final rule. 

This same commenter suggested that 

NARA should retain the 1999 language 

‘‘NARA may grant * * *’’ rather than 

automatically grant waivers. While 

NARA intends to grant waivers to 

specific requirements in the NARA 

regulation in all cases where our review 

of the waiver request (see § 1228.238) 

determines that the supporting 

documentation confirms that the 

condition(s) for the waiver have been 

met, the existing §§ 1228.238(a)(2) and 

(b)(2) clearly show that NARA may deny 

the waiver request if the conditions are 

not met to NARA’s satisfaction. We have 

withdrawn the proposed change to the 

introductory text of § 1228.236(a). It will 

continue to read: ‘‘(a) Types of waivers 

that may be approved. NARA may 

approve exceptions to one or more of 

the standards in this subpart for:’’

Section 1228.242(a) (Certifying Fire 

Safety Detection and Suppression 

Systems) 

The proposed rule modified 

§ 1228.242(a) by adding Southwest 

Research Institute as a provider of 

independent live fire testing; removing 

a requirement for computer modeling as 

part of the report furnished by a 

licensed FPE in lieu of live fire testing 

or use of a NARA-certified system; and 

providing the specific details required 

in such a report. We received two 

comments on this section. 

One comment from an individual 

objected to removing the requirement 

for computer modeling. The commenter 

stated ‘‘* * * there is no data that 

supports the removal of the use of 

computer modeling as an accurate 

method of determining the potential 

loss in the event of a fire. In the absence 

of the possibility of live testing, 

computer modeling has proven to be a 

qualified method for ensuring the 

adequate protection of a facility.’’ We 

did not accept this comment. As stated 

in the preamble to the proposed rule: 

‘‘While we continue to see the value of 

computer modeling as a supplement to 

live fire testing, we acknowledge that 

the costs of such modeling may not 

always be justified in the records center 

environment.’’ The new language in 

revised § 1228.242(a)(3) on the detailed 

information to be provided by the FPE 

will allow NARA to evaluate the 

adequacy of the fire protection. 

ICC pointed out that retaining ‘‘or 

equivalent’’ in the listing of 

organizations that perform independent 

fire testing raised questions about 

NARA’s basis for determining 

equivalency and felt that the basis 

should be part of the rules so that other 

third parties can understand the criteria 

under which they will be evaluated. 

Alternatively, ICC recommended that 

the text in paragraph (a)(2) be modified 

to read ‘‘a report of the results of 

independent fire testing conducted by a 

testing laboratory deemed as meeting 

the criteria of International Organization 

for Standardization (ISO) Standard 

17025 by an agency accredited as 

meeting ISO Guide 65.’’ To meet ICC’s 

concerns, we have removed the words 

‘‘or equivalent’’ from § 1228.242(a)(2). 

We considered ICC’s alternative 

language, but believe that listing the 

specific organizations will better serve 

small businesses who wish to take 

advantage of this alternative. 

Other Provisions of the Proposed Rule 

No comments were received on the 

other proposed rule provisions and they 

have been adopted without change in 

this final rule. 

Impact on NFPA 232 

Three individuals raised concerns 

with the impact of NARA’s regulatory 

changes on NFPA 232, Standard for the 

Protection of Records. That standard is 

independently undergoing review 

within the NFPA. The individuals 

expressed concern that the ‘‘weakening’’

of the NARA regulation would have a 

ripple effect on NFPA 232. ARMA noted 

that the proposed rule is not in 

compliance with NFPA 232 and is likely 

to increase the vulnerability of public 

and private records stored in off-site 

facilities. ARMA urged NARA to survey 

other international standards, such as 

the National Archives of Australia and 

the British Standards Institute 

standards, as a point of comparison. We 

appreciate the comments and concerns 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 50985 

but, as a Federal agency, we must 

consider the impact of our regulations 

on the regulated industry as well as the 

Federal user. 

Impact on Small Business 

In our initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis (IRFA) that was published with 

the proposed rule, we invited comments 

on the impact on small businesses. We 

asked small businesses to comment on 

other alternatives, if any, NARA should 

consider, as well as the costs and 

benefits of those alternatives to small 

business. We received comments from 

seven companies and from PRISM 

International supporting the regulation. 

There comments are discussed in 

greater depth in the following final 

regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) 

statement. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

As required by the 5 U.S.C. 604, 

NARA has prepared this final regulatory 

flexibility analysis. 

Background 

In the proposed rule published on 

September 7, 2004 (69 FR 54091), 

NARA stated its belief that the rule will 

affect small businesses that are records 

storage providers and provided an 

initial regulatory flexibility analysis 

(IRFA) in accordance with the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive 

Order 13272. We specifically invited 

comments on the IRFA in addition to 

comments on the proposed rule. 

1. Succinct Statement of the Need for 

and Objectives of the Rule 

NARA’s records center regulations 

specify the minimum structural, 

environmental, property, security, and 

fire safety standards that a records 

storage facility must meet when the 

facility is used for the storage of Federal 

records. Because Federal records 

provide essential documentation of the 

Federal Government’s policies and 

transactions and protect rights of 

individuals, they must be stored in 

appropriate space to ensure that they 

remain available for their scheduled life. 

The 2003 Report to Congress on Costs 

and Benefits of Federal Regulations 

identified the NARA regulations as a 

candidate for reform because of an 

identified adverse impact on small 

businesses. 

The objective of this regulation is to 

clarify the records center facility 

standards and modify them, where 

appropriate, to better enable records 

centers, particularly those that are small 

businesses, to be able to offer their 

services to Federal agencies while 

ensuring the continued appropriate 

protection of Federal records stored in 

off-site facilities. 

2a. Summary of the Significant Issues 

Raised by the Public Comments in 

Response to the Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis 

We received 8 comments specifically 

noting the impact of the proposed rule 

on small businesses. Seven comments 

were from records center providers, 5 of 

which specifically identified themselves 

as small businesses. The eighth 

comment was from PRISM 

International, which identified itself as 

the not-for-profit trade association 

representing the records and 

information management services 

(RIMS) industry, representing 590 RIMS 

businesses in the United States, 99 

percent of which are small businesses. 

All eight comments supported the 

proposed rule, noting that it would 

improve their ability to compete 

equitably for Federal contracts for 

records storage services. Only one 

comment specifically commented on the 

issues raised in the initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis. That small business 

strongly favored a relaxed waiver 

process outlined as alternative 2, noting 

that it believes the benefits to small 

businesses of such a process vastly 

outweigh the minor disadvantage of 

increased complexity of the Records 

Center Facility Standards. Alternative 2 

was to allow records centers that qualify 

as small businesses to apply for a waiver 

from § 1228.228(a)’s requirement for 

noncombustible roofs, and to have two 

tiers of requirements in § 1228.230 

relating to the fire-resistive rating of 

building elements. The existing (January 

2000) requirements would be retained 

for NARA records centers, agency 

records centers, and commercial records 

centers that are other than small 

businesses. 

No comments provided detailed 

information on the costs and benefits of 

the regulation. 

2b. Summary of NARA’s Assessment of 

the Issues Raised 

The initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis noted that we rejected 

alternative 2 because we felt that this 

approach would merely add an 

additional step and paperwork for small 

businesses, and the two-tier approach 

may be confusing to them. The 

proposed rule and this final rule allow 

small businesses to meet the roof 

requirement without submitting a 

waiver request. The commenter did not 

provide any details on the benefits from 

alternative 2 that would be derived by 

small businesses. 

2c. Statement of Any Changes Made in 

the Proposed Rule as a Result of Such 

Comments 

As noted in the earlier discussion of 

the comments received on the proposed 

rule, NARA clarified some provisions 

but did not accept comments that would 

have restored the burdensome 

provisions in the 1999 regulation. 

3. Description of the Number of Small 

Entities to Which the Rule Will Apply 

and Explanation of Why No Estimate Is 

Available 

The proposed rule will apply to 

NARA, to Federal agencies that operate 

their own records centers, and to any 

individual commercial records center 

facilities that a Federal agency uses to 

store its records. 

We explained in the initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis at 69 FR 54096 why 

we were not able to provide an estimate 

of the number of small entities to which 

the rule will apply. We did not obtain 

any more precise data during the 

rulemaking that would enable us to 

develop such an estimate. 

4. Description of the Projected 

Reporting, Record Keeping and Other 

Compliance Requirements for Small 

Entities 

All reporting requirements are placed 

on Federal agencies, which must secure 

NARA approval before moving Federal 

records to a commercial records center. 

However, we expect that a substantial 

portion of the reporting requirements 

would ‘‘flow down’’ to commercial 

records center operators. To 

demonstrate compliance with 

requirements in §§ 1228.228(b) and 

1228.230(a) relating to design of 

facilities with two or more stories and 

the fire detection and protection system, 

respectively, the rule offers the records 

centers an option of obtaining a report 

under professional seal by a licensed 

fire protection engineer (both sections) 

and a licensed civil/structural engineer 

(§ 1228.228(b)). We received no 

comment refuting our assumption that 

documentation requirements relating to 

multi-story facilities would apply to a 

relatively small percentage of small 

business records centers. 

If the records center owner has 

maintained the facility design records, 

no special professional skills would be 

necessary to provide documentation to 

the contracting agency that the facility 

meets the NARA standards. If the design 

records are not available, the center 

would have need for the services of a 

licensed Fire Protection Engineer to 

inspect the facility and prepare a report 

on a one-time basis. We estimate that 

50986 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

the inspection and preparation of a 

report would take no more than 16 

hours total. 

All records centers that store Federal 

records, including commercial records 

centers operated by small businesses, 

must comply with the facility 

requirements in the rule. Certain 

specific requirements differ for newly 

constructed facilities and existing 

facilities. Also, existing facilities have 

until October 1, 2009, to become 

compliant with some of these 

requirements. The facility compliance 

requirements are found in §§ 1228.228, 

1228.230, and 1228.236. 

5. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant 

Economic Impact on Small Entities 

NARA’s records center regulations 

specify the minimum structural, 

environmental, property, security, and 

fire safety standards that a records 

storage facility must meet when the 

facility is used for the storage of Federal 

records. The objective of this regulation 

is to clarify the records center facility 

standards and modify them, where 

appropriate, to better enable records 

centers, particularly those that are small 

businesses, to be able to offer their 

services to Federal agencies while 

ensuring the continued appropriate 

protection of Federal records stored in 

off-site facilities. As discussed in the 

preamble to the proposed rule, NARA 

worked with PRISM International to 

develop the revised rule. In evaluating 

the comments received on the proposed 

rule, NARA carefully considered the 

impact of those comments on the ability 

of small business records centers to 

comply with the regulation. 

NARA is authorized, under 44 U.S.C. 

2907, to establish, maintain and operate 

records centers for Federal agencies. 

NARA is authorized, under 44 U.S.C. 

3103, to approve a records center that is 

maintained and operated by an agency. 

NARA is also authorized to promulgate 

standards, procedures, and guidelines to 

Federal agencies with respect to the 

storage of their records in commercial 

records storage facilities. See 44 U.S.C. 

2104(a), 2904 and 3102. 

NARA considered, but did not adopt 

the following alternatives to this rule: 

1. No regulation. One alternative 

would be to replace the existing 

regulation with a single requirement 

that agencies must use a records center 

that complies with NFPA/ANSI 232–

2000, Standard for the Protection of 

Records. This is the voluntary 

consensus standard that applies to 

records storage facilities (we note that 

other NFPA standards apply to other 

types of warehousing). Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) 

Circular A–119 Circular directs agencies 

to use voluntary consensus standards in 

lieu of government-unique standards 

except where inconsistent with law or 

otherwise impractical. We rejected this 

alternative as it would be more stringent 

with regard to fire protection issues than 

the existing NARA records center 

facility standards (which incorporate 

most but not all of the NFPA 232 

provisions), while not including the 

environmental and pest control portions 

of our existing regulation. Based on the 

industry comments made on the draft 

2003 Report to Congress on Costs and 

Benefits of Federal Regulations and 

subsequent dialog with PRISM 

International, we believe that this 

alternative would not minimize the 

economic impact on small business 

records centers that want to provide 

records storage services for Federal 

agencies. We are unable to quantify the 

economic impact of this alternative on 

small business. 

2. Relax the waiver process for small 

businesses. This alternative would (A) 

allow records centers that qualify as 

small businesses to apply for a waiver 

from § 1228.228(a)’s requirement for 

noncombustible roofs but retain the 

requirement for records centers that are 

not small businesses, and (B) reduce the 

requirements in § 1228.230 relating to 

the fire-resistive rating of building 

elements for small businesses only. The 

existing (January 2000) requirements 

would be retained for NARA records 

centers, agency records centers, and 

commercial records centers that are 

other than small businesses. We rejected 

this alternative because it would not 

provide a distinct advantage to small 

businesses, given our research that the 

majority of records centers would 

qualify as small businesses (see 69 FR 

54096). 

Other Information Pertaining to This 

Rule 

This final rule is a significant 

regulatory action for the purposes of 

Executive Order 12866 and has been 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget. This regulation does not 

have any federalism implications. This 

rule is not a major rule as defined in 5 

U.S.C. Chapter 8, Congressional Review 

of Agency Rulemaking. 

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 1228 

Archives and records, Incorporation 

by reference. 

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, NARA amends Part 1228 of 

Title 36 of the CFR as follows: 

PART 1228—DISPOSITION OF 

FEDERAL RECORDS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1228 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 44 U.S.C. chs. 21, 29, and 33. 

■ 1. Revise paragraph (b) of § 1228.222 

to read: 

§ 1228.222 What does this subpart cover? 

* * * * * 

(b) Except where specifically noted, 

this subpart applies to all records 

storage facilities. Certain noted 

provisions apply only to new records 

storage facilities established or placed in 

service on or after September 28, 2005. 

■ 3. Amend § 1228.224 by revising the 

entry for ‘‘NFPA 13’’ and adding a new 

entry for ‘‘NFPA 54’’ in numerical order 

in paragraph (c) and adding paragraph 

(g) to read as follows: 

§ 1228.224 Publications incorporated by 

reference. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

NFPA 13, Standard for Installation of 

Sprinkler Systems (2002 Edition), IBR 

approved for §§ 1228.228(a)(1), 

1228.230(e), and 1228.230(i) 

* * * * * 

NFPA 54, National Fuel Gas Code 

(2002 Edition), IBR approved for 

§ 1228.230 

* * * * * 

(g) International Association of 

Plumbing and Mechanical Officials 

(IAPMO) standards. The following 

IAPMO standard is available from the 

International Association of Plumbing 

and Mechanical Officials, 5001 E. 

Philadelphia Street, Ontario, CA 91761: 

IAPMO, Uniform Mechanical Code 

(2003 Edition), IBR approved for 

§ 1228.230. 

■ 4. Amend § 1228.226 by revising the 

definitions of ‘‘Existing records storage 

facility’’, ‘‘New records storage facility’’, 

and ‘‘Records storage area’’ to read: 

§ 1228.226 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Existing records storage facility means 

any records center or commercial 

records storage facility used to store 

records on September 27, 2005, and that 

has stored records continuously since 

that date. 

* * * * * 

New records storage facility means 

any records center or commercial 

records storage facility established or 

converted for use as a records center or 

commercial records storage facility on 

or after September 28, 2005. 

* * * * * 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 50987 

Records storage area means the area 

intended for long-term storage of 

records that is enclosed by four fire 

barrier walls, the floor, and the ceiling. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend § 1228.228 by revising 

paragraphs (a), (b), (d), (g)(1), (h)(1), (i) 

introductory text, (i)(1), (i)(2), (n)(1), and 

(n)(4) to read: 

§ 1228.228 What are the facility 

requirements for all records storage 

facilities? 

(a) The facility must be constructed 

with non-combustible materials and 

building elements, including walls, 

columns and floors. There are two 

exceptions to this requirement: 

(1) Roof elements may be constructed 

with combustible materials if installed 

in accordance with local building codes 

and if roof elements are protected by a 

properly installed, properly maintained 

wet-pipe automatic sprinkler system, as 

specified in NFPA 13, Installation of 

Sprinkler Systems (incorporated by 

reference, see § 1228.224). 

(2) An agency may request a waiver of 

the requirement specified in paragraph 

(a) from NARA for an existing records 

storage facility with combustible 

building elements to continue to operate 

until October 1, 2009. In its request for 

a waiver, the agency must provide 

documentation that the facility has a fire 

suppression system specifically 

designed to mitigate this hazard and 

that the system meets the requirements 

of § 1228.230(s). Requests must be 

submitted to the Director, Space and 

Security Management Division (NAS), 

National Archives and Records 

Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road, 

College Park, MD 20740–6001. 

(b) A facility with two or more stories 

must be designed or reviewed by a 

licensed fire protection engineer and 

civil/structural engineer to avoid 

catastrophic failure of the structure due 

to an uncontrolled fire on one of the 

intermediate floor levels. For new 

buildings the seals on the construction 

drawings serve as proof of this review. 

For existing buildings, this requirement 

may be demonstrated by a professional 

letter of opinion under seal by a 

licensed fire protection engineer that the 

fire resistance of the separating floor(s) 

is/(are) at least four hours, and a 

professional letter of opinion under seal 

by a licensed civil/structural engineer 

that there are no obvious structural 

weaknesses that would indicate a high 

potential for structural catastrophic 

collapse under fire conditions. 

* * * * * 

(d) The facility must be designed in 

accordance with the applicable national, 

regional, state, or local building codes 

(whichever is most stringent) to provide 

protection from building collapse or 

failure of essential equipment from 

earthquake hazards, tornadoes, 

hurricanes and other potential natural 

disasters. 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(1) New records storage facilities must 

meet the requirements in this paragraph 

(g) beginning on September 28, 2005. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

(1) New records storage facilities must 

meet the requirements in this paragraph 

(h) beginning on September 28, 2005. 

* * * * * 

(i) The following standards apply to 

records storage shelving and racking 

systems: 

(1) All storage shelving and racking 

systems must be designed and installed 

to provide seismic bracing that meets 

the requirements of the applicable state, 

regional, and local building code 

(whichever is most stringent); 

(2) Racking systems, steel shelving, or 

other open-shelf records storage 

equipment must be braced to prevent 

collapse under full load. Each racking 

system or shelving unit must be 

industrial style shelving rated at least 50 

pounds per cubic foot supported by the 

shelf; 

* * * * * 

(n) * * * 

(1) Do not install mechanical 

equipment, excluding material handling 

and conveyance equipment that have 

operating thermal breakers on the 

motor, containing motors rated in excess 

of 1 HP within records storage areas 

(either floor mounted or suspended 

from roof support structures). 

* * * * * 

(4) A facility storing permanent 

records must be kept under positive air 

pressure, especially in the area of the 

loading dock. In addition, to prevent 

fumes from vehicle exhausts from 

entering the facility, air intake louvers 

must not be located in the area of the 

loading dock, adjacent to parking areas, 

or in any location where a vehicle 

engine may be running for any period of 

time. Loading docks must have an air 

supply and exhaust system that is 

separate from the remainder of the 

facility. 

■ 6. Amend § 1228.230 by revising 

paragraphs (a), (b), (e), (i), (l), and (s) to 

read: 

§ 1228.230 What are the fire safety 

requirements that apply to records storage 

facilities? 

(a) The fire detection and protection 

systems must be designed or reviewed 

by a licensed fire protection engineer. If 

the system was not designed by a 

licensed fire protection engineer, the 

review requirement is met by furnishing 

a report under the seal of a licensed fire 

protection engineer that describes the 

design intent of the fire detection and 

suppression system, detailing the 

characteristics of the system, and 

describing the specific measures beyond 

the minimum features required by code 

that have been incorporated to minimize 

loss. The report should make specific 

reference to appropriate industry 

standards used in the design, such as 

those issued by the National Fire 

Protection Association, and any testing 

or modeling or other sources used in the 

design. 

(b) All interior walls separating 

records storage areas from each other 

and from other storage areas in the 

building must be at least three-hour fire 

barrier walls. A records storage facility 

may not store more than 250,000 cubic 

feet total of Federal records in a single 

records storage area. When Federal 

records are combined with other records 

in a single records storage area, only the 

Federal records will apply toward this 

limitation. 

* * * * * 

(e) The fire resistive rating of the roof 

must be a minimum of 1⁄2 hour for all 

records storage facilities, or must be 

protected by an automatic sprinkler 

system designed, installed, and 

maintained in accordance with NFPA 

13 (incorporated by reference, see 

§ 1228.224). 

* * * * * 

(i) Building columns in the records 

storage areas must be at least 1-hour fire 

resistant or protected in accordance 

with NFPA 13 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 1228.224). 

* * * * * 

(l) Open flame (oil or gas) unit heaters 

or equipment, if used in records storage 

areas, must be installed or used in the 

records storage area in accordance with 

NFPA 54 (incorporated by reference, see 

§ 1228.224), and the IAPMO/ANSI UMC 

1–2003, Uniform Mechanical Code 

(incorporated by reference, see 

§ 1228.224). 

* * * * * 

(s) All record storage and adjoining 

areas must be protected by a 

professionally-designed fire-safety 

detection and suppression system that is 

designed to limit the maximum 

anticipated loss in any single fire event 

50988 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

involving a single ignition and no more 

than 8 ounces of accelerant to a 

maximum of 300 cubic feet of records 

destroyed by fire. Section 1228.242 

specifies how to document compliance 

with this requirement. 

■ 7. Amend § 1228.232 by revising the 

introductory text of paragraph (b) and 

paragraph (c) to read: 

§ 1228.232 What are the requirements for 

environmental controls for records storage 

facilities? 

* * * * * 

(b) Nontextual temporary records. 

Nontextual temporary records, 

including microforms and audiovisual 

and electronic records, must be stored 

in records storage space that is designed 

to preserve them for their full retention 

period. New records storage facilities 

that store nontextual temporary records 

must meet the requirements in this 

paragraph (b) beginning on September 

28, 2005. Existing records storage 

facilities that store nontextual 

temporary records must meet the 

requirements in this paragraph (b) no 

later than October 1, 2009. At a 

minimum, nontextual temporary 

records must be stored in records 

storage space that meets the 

requirements for medium term storage 

set by the appropriate standard in this 

paragraph (b). In general, medium term 

conditions as defined by these standards 

are those that will ensure the 

preservation of the materials for at least 

10 years with little information 

degradation or loss. Records may 

continue to be usable for longer than 10 

years when stored under these 

conditions, but with an increasing risk 

of information loss or degradation with 

longer times. If temporary records 

require retention longer than 10 years, 

better storage conditions (cooler and 

drier) than those specified for medium 

term storage will be needed to maintain 

the usability of these records. The 

applicable standards are: 

* * * * * 

(c) Paper-based permanent, 

unscheduled and sample/select records. 

Paper-based permanent, unscheduled, 

and sample/select records must be 

stored in records storage space that 

provides 24 hour/365 days per year air 

conditioning (temperature, humidity, 

and air exchange) equivalent to that 

required for office space. See ASHRAE 

Standard 55–1992, Thermal 

Environmental Conditions for Human 

Occupancy, and ASHRAE Standard 62–

1989, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor 

Air Quality, for specific requirements. 

New records storage facilities that store 

paper-based permanent, unscheduled, 

and/or sample/select records must meet 

the requirement in this paragraph (c) 

beginning on September 28, 2005. 

Existing storage facilities that store 

paper-based permanent, unscheduled, 

and/or sample/select records must meet 

the requirement in this paragraph (c) no 

later than October 1, 2009. 

* * * * * 

■ 8. Amend § 1228.236 by revising 

paragraph (a)(2) to read: 

§ 1228.236 How does an agency request a 

waiver from a requirement in this subpart? 

(a) * * * 

(2) Existing agency records centers 

that met the NARA standards in effect 

prior to January 3, 2000, but do not meet 

a new standard required to be in place 

on September 28, 2005; and 

* * * * * 

■ 9. Amend § 1228.240 by revising 

paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 1228.240 How does an agency request 

authority to establish or relocate records 

storage facilities? 

* * * * * 

(c) Contents of requests for agency 

records centers. Requests for authority 

to establish or relocate an agency 

records center, or to use an agency 

records center operated by another 

agency, must be submitted in writing to 

the Director, Space and Security 

Management Division (NAS), National 

Archives and Records Administration, 

8601 Adelphi Road, College Park, MD 

20740–6001. The request must identify 

the specific facility and, for requests to 

establish or relocate the agency’s own 

records center, document compliance 

with the standards in this subpart. 

Documentation requirements for 

§ 1228.230(s) are specified in 

§ 1228.242. 

* * * * * 

■ 10. Amend § 1228.242 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3) to read: 

§ 1228.242 What does an agency have to 

do to certify a fire-safety detection and 

suppression system? 

(a) * * * 

(2) A report of the results of 

independent live fire testing (Factory 

Mutual, Underwriters Laboratories or 

Southwest Research Institute); or 

(3) A report under seal of a licensed 

fire protection engineer that: 

(i) Describes the design intent of the 

fire suppression system to limit the 

maximum anticipated loss in any single 

fire event involving a single ignition and 

no more than 8 fluid ounces of 

petroleum-type hydrocarbon accelerant 

(such as, for example, heptanes or 

gasoline) to a maximum of 300 cubic 

feet of Federal records destroyed by fire. 

The report need not predict a maximum 

single event loss at any specific number, 

but rather should describe the design 

intent of the fire suppression system. 

The report may make reasonable 

engineering and other assumptions such 

as that the fire department responds 

within XX minutes (the local fire 

department’s average response time) 

and promptly commences suppression 

actions. In addition, any report prepared 

under this paragraph should assume 

that the accelerant is saturated in a 

cotton wick that is 3 inches in diameter 

and 6 inches long and sealed in a plastic 

bag and that the fire is started in an aisle 

at the face of a carton at floor level. 

Assumptions must be noted in the 

report; 

(ii) Details the characteristics of the 

system; and 

(iii) Describes the specific measures 

beyond the minimum features required 

by the applicable building code that 

have been incorporated to limit 

destruction of records. The report 

should make specific references to 

industry standards used in the design, 

such as those issued by the National 

Fire Protection Association, and any 

testing or modeling or other sources 

used in the design. 

* * * * * 

Dated: June 29, 2005. 

Allen Weinstein, 

Archivist of the United States. 

[FR Doc. 05–17097 Filed 8–26–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7515–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[OAR–2003–0090; FRL–7959–2] 

[RIN 2060–AN04] 

Extension of the Deferred Effective 

Date for 8-Hour Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards for 

Early Action Compact Areas 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final Rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is finalizing the 

extension of the deferred effective date 

of air quality designations for 14 areas 

of the country that have entered into 

Early Action Compacts. Early Action 

Compact areas have agreed to reduce 

ground-level ozone pollution earlier 

than the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires. 

On April 30, 2004, EPA published an 

action designating all areas of the 

country for the 8-hour ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards