This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

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

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

63897

Vol. 60, No. 239

Wednesday, December 13, 1995

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 9

RIN 3150–AD83

Revision of Specific Exemptions Under

the Privacy Act

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) is amending its

regulations to add exemptions

authorized by subsections (j)(2) and

(k)(5) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as

amended (Privacy Act), to those

currently in place for System of Records

NRC–18, ‘‘Office of the Inspector

General (OIG) Investigative Records—

NRC,’’ under subsections (k)(1), (k)(2),

and (k)(6). The additional exemptions

for NRC–18 are necessary to maintain

the integrity and confidentiality of these

records, to protect the privacy of third

parties, and to avoid interference with

law enforcement activities. The final

rule also updates the list of exemptions

that apply to specific NRC systems of

records and is necessary to eliminate

any confusion regarding the

exemption(s) applicable to each system.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 12, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jona

L. Souder, Privacy Act Program

Manager, Freedom of Information/Local

Public Document Room Branch,

Division of Freedom of Information and

Publications Services, Office of

Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001, Telephone: 301–415–7170.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On July 26, 1995 (60 FR 38282), the

NRC published a proposed rule in the

Federal Register that would amend

NRC’s Privacy Act regulations contained

in 10 CFR part 9, subpart B. The

proposed amendments would add

subsections (j)(2) and (k)(5) exemptions

to Privacy Act System of Records NRC–

18, ‘‘Office of the Inspector General

(OIG) Investigative Records—NRC,’’ and

update the list of exemptions that apply

to specific NRC systems of records. On

July 26, 1995 (60 FR 38379), the NRC

published revisions to NRC–18 that

would, among other things, add

subsections (j)(2) and (k)(5) exemptions

and two new routine uses, revise

existing routine uses, and permit

disclosures to consumer reporting

agencies. The public was provided 40

days in which to comment on the two

notices. No comments have been

received. In addition, as required by 5

U.S.C. 552a(r) and Office of

Management and Budget (OMB)

Circular No. A–130, a report on the

proposed revisions to the system of

records and 10 CFR Part 9 was sent to

the Committee on Government Reform

and Oversight, U.S. House of

Representatives, the Committee on

Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate, and

OMB.

Under subsection (j)(2) of the Privacy

Act, the head of an agency may issue

rules to exempt any system of records

within that agency from certain

provisions of the Privacy Act if the

system is maintained by an agency

component whose principal function

pertains to the enforcement of criminal

laws and if the system of records

consists of information compiled for a

criminal law enforcement purpose.

NRC–18 is maintained by the OIG, a

component of NRC which performs, as

one of its principal functions,

investigations into violations of criminal

law in connection with NRC’s programs

and operations in accordance with the

Inspector General Act of 1978, as

amended, and contains criminal law

enforcement information. Therefore,

pursuant to subsection (j)(2), NRC–18 is

exempt from all provisions of the

Privacy Act except subsections (b), (c)(1)

and (2), (e)(4)(A) through (F), (e)(6),

(e)(7), (e)(9), (e)(10), (e)(11), and (i).

The disclosure of information

contained in NRC–18, including the

names of persons or agencies to whom

the information has been transmitted,

would substantially compromise the

effectiveness of OIG investigations.

Knowledge of these investigations could

enable suspects to prevent detection of

criminal activities, conceal or destroy

evidence, or escape prosecution.

Disclosure of this information could

lead to the intimidation of, or harm to,

informants and witnesses, and their

families, and could jeopardize the safety

and well-being of investigative and

related personnel, and their families.

The imposition of certain restrictions on

the way investigative information is

collected, verified, or retained would

significantly impede the effectiveness of

OIG investigatory activities and could

preclude the apprehension and

successful prosecution of persons

engaged in fraud or criminal activity.

The exemption is needed to maintain

the integrity and confidentiality of

criminal investigations, to protect

individuals from harm, and for the

following specific reasons:

(1) 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) requires an

agency to make the accounting of each

disclosure of records available to the

individual named in the record at the

individual’s request. These accountings

must state the date, nature, and purpose

of each disclosure of a record and the

name and address of the recipient.

Accounting for each disclosure would

alert the subjects of an investigation to

the existence of the investigation and

that they are subjects of the

investigation. The release of this

information to the subjects of an

investigation would provide them with

significant information concerning the

nature of the investigation and could

seriously impede or compromise the

investigation, endanger the physical

safety of confidential sources, witnesses,

law enforcement personnel, and their

families, and lead to the improper

influencing of witnesses, the destruction

of evidence, or the fabrication of

testimony.

(2) 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(4) requires an

agency to inform outside parties of

correction of and notation of disputes

about information in a system in

accordance with subsection (d) of the

Privacy Act. Because this system of

records is being exempted from

subsection (d) concerning access to

records, this section is inapplicable to

the extent that the system of records

will be exempted from subsection (d) of

the Privacy Act.

(3) 5 U.S.C. 552a(d) and (f) require an

agency to provide access to records,

make corrections and amendments to
63898 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 13, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

records, and notify individuals of the

existence of records upon their request.

Providing individuals with access to

records of an investigation, the right to

contest the contents of those records,

and the opportunity to force changes to

be made to the information in those

records would seriously interfere with

and thwart the orderly and unbiased

conduct of the investigation and impede

case preparation. Permitting the access

normally afforded under the Privacy Act

would provide the subject with valuable

information that would allow

interference with or compromise of

witnesses or render witnesses reluctant

to cooperate with investigators; lead to

suppression, alteration, fabrication, or

destruction of evidence; endanger the

physical safety of confidential sources,

witnesses, law enforcement personnel,

and their families; and result in the

secreting of or other disposition of

assets that would make them difficult or

impossible to reach to satisfy any

Government claims growing out of the

investigation.

(4) 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(1) requires an

agency to maintain in agency records

only ‘‘relevant and necessary’’

information about an individual. This

provision is inappropriate for

investigations because it is not always

possible to detect the relevance or

necessity of each piece of information in

the early stages of an investigation. In

some cases, it is only after the

information is evaluated in light of other

evidence that its relevance and

necessity will be clear. In other cases,

what may appear to be a relevant and

necessary piece of information may

become irrelevant in light of further

investigation.

In addition, during the course of an

investigation, the investigator may

obtain information that relates primarily

to matters under the investigative

jurisdiction of another agency, and that

information may not be reasonably

segregated. In the interest of effective

law enforcement, OIG investigators

should retain this information because it

can aid in establishing patterns of

criminal activity and can provide

valuable leads for Federal and other law

enforcement agencies.

(5) 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(2) requires an

agency to collect information to the

greatest extent practicable directly from

the subject individual, when the

information may result in adverse

determinations about an individual’s

rights, benefits, and privileges under

Federal programs. The general rule that

information be collected ‘‘to the greatest

extent practicable’’ from the target

individual is not appropriate in

investigations. OIG investigators should

be authorized to use their professional

judgment as to the appropriate sources

and timing of an investigation. It is often

necessary to conduct an investigation so

the target does not suspect that he or she

is being investigated. The requirement

to obtain the information from the

targeted individual may put the suspect

on notice of the investigation and thwart

the investigation by enabling the

suspect to destroy evidence and take

other action that would impede the

investigation. This requirement may

also prevent an OIG investigator from

gathering information and evidence

before interviewing an investigative

target to maximize the value of the

interview by confronting the target with

the evidence or information. In certain

circumstances, the subject of an

investigation cannot be required to

provide information to investigators and

information must be collected from

other sources. It is often necessary to

collect information from sources other

than the subject of the investigation to

verify the accuracy of the evidence

collected.

In addition, the statutory term ‘‘to the

greatest extent practicable’’ is a

subjective standard. It is impossible to

define the term adequately so that

individual OIG investigators can

consistently apply it to the many fact

patterns present in OIG investigations.

(6) 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(3) requires an

agency to inform each person whom it

asks to supply information on a form

that can be retained by the person of the

authority under which the information

is sought and whether disclosure is

mandatory or voluntary, of the principal

purposes for which the information is

intended to be used, of the routine uses

that may be made of the information,

and of the effects on the person, if any,

of not providing all or some part of the

requested information. The application

of this provision could provide the

subject of an investigation with

substantial information about the nature

of that investigation that could interfere

with the investigation. Moreover,

providing such a notice to the subject of

an investigation could seriously impede

or compromise an undercover

investigation by revealing its existence

and could endanger the physical safety

of confidential sources, witnesses,

investigators, and their families, by

revealing their identities.

(7) 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4)(G) and (H)

require an agency to publish a Federal

Register notice concerning its

procedures for notifying an individual

at his or her request, if the system of

records contains a record pertaining to

him or her, how to gain access to such

a record, and how to contest its content.

Because this system of records is being

exempted from subsections (d) and (f) of

the Privacy Act concerning access to

records and agency rules, respectively,

these requirements are inapplicable to

the extent that the system of records

will be exempted from these

requirements. However, OIG has

published some information concerning

its notification, access, and contest

procedures. Under certain

circumstances, OIG could decide it is

appropriate for an individual to have

access to all or a portion of his or her

records in the system.

(8) 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4)(I) requires an

agency to publish notice of the

categories of sources of records in the

system of records. To the extent that this

provision is construed to require more

detailed disclosure than the broad,

generic information currently published

in the system notice, an exemption from

this provision is necessary to protect the

confidentiality of sources of

information, to protect privacy and

physical safety of witnesses and

informants, and to avoid the disclosure

of investigative techniques and

procedures. OIG will continue to

publish such a notice in broad generic

terms as is its current practice.

(9) 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(5) requires an

agency to maintain its records with such

accuracy, relevance, timeliness, and

completeness as is reasonably necessary

to ensure fairness to the individual in

making any determination about the

individual. Much the same rationale is

applicable to this exemption as that set

out previously in item (4) (duty to

maintain in agency records only

‘‘relevant and necessary’’ information

about an individual). Although the OIG

makes every effort to maintain records

that are accurate, relevant, timely, and

complete, it is not always possible in an

investigation to determine with

certainty that all of the information

collected is accurate, relevant, timely,

and complete. During a thorough

investigation, a trained investigator

would be expected to collect allegations,

conflicting information, and information

that may not be based upon the personal

knowledge of the provider. When OIG

decides to refer the matter to a

prosecutive agency, for example, that

information would be in the system of

records and it may not be possible to

determine the accuracy, relevance, and

completeness of some information until

further investigation is conducted, or

indeed in many cases until after a trial

(if at all). This requirement would

inhibit the ability of trained

investigators to exercise professional

judgment in conducting a thorough

investigation. Moreover, fairness to
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 13, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 63899

affected individuals is ensured by the

due process they are accorded in any

trial or other proceeding resulting from

the OIG investigations.

(10) 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(8) requires that

an agency make reasonable efforts to

serve notice on an individual when any

record on the individual is made

available to any person under

compulsory legal process when such

process becomes a matter of public

record. Exemption from this

requirement is needed to avoid

revealing investigative techniques and

procedures outlined in those records

and to avoid prematurely revealing an

ongoing criminal investigation to the

subject of the investigation.

(11) 5 U.S.C. 552a(g) provides for civil

remedies if any agency fails to comply

with the requirements concerning

access to records under subsections

(d)(1) and (3) of the Privacy Act,

maintenance of records under

subsection (e)(5) of the Privacy Act, and

any other provision of the Privacy Act,

or any rule issued thereunder, in such

a way as to have an adverse effect on an

individual. Allowing civil lawsuits for

alleged Privacy Act violations by OIG

investigators would compromise OIG

investigations by subjecting the

sensitive and confidential information

in the OIG system of records to the

possibility of inappropriate disclosure

under the liberal civil discovery rules.

That discovery may reveal confidential

sources, the identity of informants, and

investigative procedures and

techniques, to the detriment of the

particular criminal investigation as well

as other investigations conducted by

OIG.

The pendency of such a suit would

have a chilling effect on investigations,

given the possibility of discovery of the

contents of the investigative case file. A

Privacy Act lawsuit could become a

strategic weapon used to impede OIG

investigations. Because the system

would be exempt from many of the

Privacy Act’s requirements, it is

unnecessary and contradictory to

provide for civil remedies from

violations of those specific provisions.

Under subsection (k)(5) of the Privacy

Act, the head of an agency may, by rule,

exempt any system of records within the

agency from certain provisions of the

Privacy Act if the system of records

contains investigatory material

compiled solely for the purpose of

determining suitability, eligibility, or

qualifications for Federal civilian

employment, military service, Federal

contracts, or access to classified

information. However, these records

would be exempt only to the extent that

the disclosure of this material would

reveal the identity of a source who

furnished information to the

Government under an express promise

that the identity of the source would be

held in confidence, or, prior to the

effective date of this section, under an

implied promise that the identity of the

source would be held in confidence.

NRC–18 contains information of the

type described above. Therefore, in

accordance with subsection (k)(5), NRC–

18 is exempt from subsections (c)(3), (d),

(e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I), and (f) of

the Privacy Act to honor promises of

confidentiality should the data subject

request access to or amendment of the

records, or access to the accounting of

disclosure of the records for the

following reasons:

(1) 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) requires an

agency to grant access to the accounting

of disclosures including the date,

nature, and purpose of each disclosure,

and the identity of the recipient. The

release of this information to the record

subject could alert them to the existence

of the investigation or prosecutive

interest by NRC or other agencies. This

could seriously compromise case

preparation by prematurely revealing

the existence and nature of the

investigation; compromise or interfere

with witnesses, or make witnesses

reluctant to cooperate; and could lead to

suppression, alteration, or destruction of

evidence.

(2) 5 U.S.C. 552a(d) and (f) require an

agency to provide access to records,

make corrections and amendments to

records, and notify individuals of the

existence of records upon their request.

Providing individuals with access to

records of an investigation, the right to

contest the contents of those records,

and the opportunity to force changes to

be made to the information in the

records would seriously interfere with

and thwart the orderly and unbiased

conduct of the investigation and impede

case preparation. Providing access rights

normally afforded under the Privacy Act

would provide the subject with valuable

information that would allow

interference with or compromise of

witnesses or render witnesses reluctant

to cooperate; lead to suppression,

alteration, or destruction of evidence;

and result in the secreting of or other

disposition of assets that would make

them difficult or impossible to reach to

satisfy any Government claims growing

out of the investigation or proceeding.

(3) 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(1) requires

agencies to maintain only ‘‘relevant and

necessary’’ information about an

individual in agency records. This

provision is inappropriate for

investigations because it is not always

possible to detect the relevance or

necessity of each piece of information in

the early stages of an investigation. In

some cases, it is only after the

information is evaluated in light of other

evidence that its relevance and

necessity will be clear.

(4) Because NRC–18 is being

exempted from the underlying duties to

provide notification about and access to

information in the system and to make

amendments to and corrections of the

information under subsections (d) and

(f) of the Privacy Act, the requirements

of 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4) (G) and (H) are

inapplicable.

(5) 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4)(I) requires an

agency to publish notice of the

categories of sources of records in the

system of records. To the extent that this

provision is construed to require more

detailed disclosure than the broad,

generic information currently published

in the system notice, an exemption from

this provision is necessary to protect the

confidentiality of sources of information

and to protect the privacy and physical

safety of witnesses and informants.

However, the OIG will continue to

publish such a notice in broad generic

terms as is its current practice.

In addition, 10 CFR 9.95 is being

amended to update the list of

exemptions that apply to specific

systems of records. The list includes

NRC–23, ‘‘Office of Investigations

Indices, Files, and Associated Records—

NRC,’’ and NRC–35, ‘‘Drug Testing

Program Records—NRC,’’ for which

corresponding Part 9 amendments were

not previously prepared when each new

system was established. NRC–40 has

been deleted from this list because a

review of the system revealed that the

subsections (k)(5) and (k)(6) exemptions

of the Privacy Act were no longer

needed. This amendment will eliminate

any confusion regarding the specific

exemption(s) applicable to each system

of records.

Environmental Impact—Categorical

Exclusion

The NRC has determined that this

rule is the type of action described in

categorical exclusion 10 CFR

51.22(c)(1). Therefore, neither an

environmental impact statement nor an

environmental assessment has been

prepared for this final rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

This final rule does not contain a new

or amended information collection

requirement subject to the Paperwork

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

et seq.). Existing requirements were

approved by the Office of Management

and Budget, approval number 3150–

0043.
63900 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 13, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Regulatory Analysis

This final rule adds exemption (j)(2)

of the Privacy Act to the NRC

regulations that describe exempt

systems of records. This is an

administrative regulatory action that

would make NRC’s regulations

consistent with the regulations

applicable to the majority of statutorily

appointed Inspectors General. The rule

also adds the (j)(2) and (k)(5)

exemptions to the system of records

maintained by OIG and clearly links

each NRC system of records to the

specific exemption(s) of the Privacy Act

under which the system is exempt. The

rule does not have an economic impact

on any class of licensee or the NRC. By

more clearly indicating the exemptions

under which a system is exempt and by

conforming NRC’s regulations to those

of the majority of statutorily appointed

Inspectors General, the rule may

provide some benefit to those who may

be required to use these regulations.

The alternative to the rule would be

to refrain from adopting the identified

exemptions. As discussed in this

document, failure to adopt the rule

could have detrimental effects on the

OIG’s investigative program and its

ability to obtain and protect

information.

This constitutes the regulatory

analysis for this final rule.

Regulatory Flexibility Certification

As required by the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the

Commission certifies that this final rule

does not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. The amendments to 10 CFR

part 9 are procedural in nature and will

aid an NRC office to perform its

criminal law enforcement functions. In

addition, the amendments will

eliminate any confusion regarding

specific exemptions available to each

affected Privacy Act system of records

notice.

Backfit Analysis

The NRC has determined that the

backfit rule 10 CFR 50.109 does not

apply to this final rule and, therefore, a

backfit analysis is not required because

these amendments do not involve any

provisions that would impose backfits

as defined in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1).

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 9

Criminal penalties, Freedom of

information, Privacy, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Sunshine

Act.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble and under the authority of the

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended;

the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,

as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553,

the NRC is adopting the following

amendments to 10 CFR part 9.

PART 9—PUBLIC RECORDS

1. The authority citation for part 9

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Sec. 161, 68 Stat. 948, as

amended (42 U.S.C. 2201); sec. 201, 88 Stat.

1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841).

Subpart A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552;

31 U.S.C. 9701; Pub. L. 99–570. Subpart B

also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a. Subpart C

also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552b.

2. In § 9.52, paragraph (b)(4) is revised

to read as follows:

§ 9.52 Types of requests.

* * * * *

(b) Requests for accounting of

disclosures. * * * (4) Disclosures

expressly exempted by NRC regulations

from the requirements of 5 U.S.C.

552a(c)(3) pursuant to 5 U.S.C.

552a(j)(2) and (k).

3. In § 9.61, current paragraph (b) is

redesignated as paragraph (c), and a new

paragraph (b) is added to read as

follows:

§ 9.61 Procedures for processing requests

for records exempt in whole or in part.

* * * * *

(b) General exemptions. Generally, 5

U.S.C. 552a(j)(2) allows the exemption

of any system of records within the NRC

from any part of section 552a except

subsections (b), (c)(1) and (2), (e)(4)(A)

through (F), (e)(6), (7), (9), (10), and (11),

and (i) of the act if the system of records

is maintained by an NRC component

that performs as one of its principal

functions any activity pertaining to the

enforcement of criminal laws, including

police efforts to prevent, control, or

reduce crimes, or to apprehend

criminals, and consists of—

(1) Information compiled for the

purpose of identifying individual

criminal offenders and alleged offenders

and consisting only of identifying data

and notations of arrests, the nature and

disposition of criminal charges,

sentencing, confinement, release and

parole, and probation status;

(2) Information compiled for the

purpose of a criminal investigation,

including reports of informants and

investigators, and associated with an

identifiable individual; or

(3) Reports identifiable to an

individual compiled at any stage of the

process of enforcement of the criminal

laws from arrest or indictment through

release from supervision.

* * * * *

4. In § 9.80, paragraphs (a)(6), (10),

and (11) are revised and a new

paragraph (a)(12) is added to read as

follows:

§ 9.80 Disclosure of record to persons

other than the individual to whom it

pertains.

(a) * * *

(6) To the National Archives and

Records Administration as a record that

has sufficient historical or other value to

warrant its continued preservation by

the United States Government, or to the

Archivist of the United States or

designee for evaluation to determine

whether the record has such value;

* * * * *

(10) To the Comptroller General, or

any authorized representatives, in the

course of the performance of the duties

of the General Accounting Office;

(11) Pursuant to the order of a court

of competent jurisdiction; or

(12) To a consumer reporting agency

in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 3711(f).

5. Section 9.95 is revised to read as

follows:

§ 9.95 Specific exemptions.

The following records contained in

the designated NRC Systems of Records

(NRC–5, NRC–9, NRC–11, NRC–18,

NRC–22, NRC–23, NRC–28, NRC–29,

NRC–31, NRC–33, NRC–35, NRC–37,

and NRC–39) are exempt from 5 U.S.C.

552a(c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H), and

(I), and (f) in accordance with 5 U.S.C.

552a(k). In addition, the records

contained in NRC–18 are exempt from

the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a and the

regulations in this part, under 5 U.S.C.

552a(j)(2), except subsections (b), (c)(1)

and (2), (e)(4)(A) through (F), (e)(6), (7),

(9), (10), and (11), and (i). Each of these

systems of records is subject to the

provisions of § 9.61:

(a) Contracts Records Files, NRC–5

(Exemptions (k)(1) and (k)(5));

(b) Equal Employment Opportunity

Discrimination Complaint Files, NRC–9

(Exemption (k)(5));

(c) General Personnel Records

(Official Personnel Folder and Related

Records), NRC–11 (Exemptions (k)(5)

and (k)(6));

(d) Office of the Inspector General

(OIG) Investigative Records, NRC–18

(Exemptions (j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(5),

and (k)(6));

(e) Personnel Performance Appraisals,

NRC–22 (Exemptions (k)(1) and (k)(5));

(f) Office of Investigations Indices,

Files, and Associated Records, NRC- 23

(Exemptions (k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(6));

(g) Recruiting, Examining, and

Placement Records, NRC–28 (Exemption

(k)(5));

(h) Nuclear Documents System

(NUDOCS), NRC–29 (Exemption (k)(1));
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 13, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 63901

(i) Correspondence and Records,

Office of the Secretary, NRC–31

(Exemption (k)(1));

(j) Special Inquiry File, NRC–33

(Exemptions (k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(5));

(k) Drug Testing Program Records,

NRC–35 (Exemption (k)(5));

(l) Information Security Files and

Associated Records, NRC–37

(Exemptions (k)(1) and (k)(5)); and

(m) Personnel Security Files and

Associated Records, NRC–39

(Exemptions (k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(5)).

Dated at Rockville, MD., this 1st day of

December, 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

James M. Taylor,

Executive Director for Operations.

[FR Doc. 95–30173 Filed 12–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. NM–120; Special Conditions

No. 25–ANM–110]

Special Conditions: Jetstream Aircraft

Limited Model 4101 Series Airplanes;

Automatic Takeoff Thrust Control

System

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions, request

for comments.

SUMMARY: These special conditions are

issued to Jetstream Aircraft Limited for

the Jetstream Model 4101 series

airplanes. This airplane will have an

unusual design feature for which the

applicable airworthiness regulations do

not contain appropriate safety

standards. The unusual design feature is

an Automatic Takeoff Thrust Control

System (ATTCS) that resets power on

the operating engine for compliance

with the approach climb performance

requirements in § 25.121(d). These

special conditions contain the

additional safety standards that the

Administrator considers necessary to

establish a level of safety equivalent to

that established by the existing

airworthiness standards.

DATES: The effective date of these

special conditions is December 6, 1995.

Comments must be received on or

before January 29, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments on these final

special conditions, request for

comments, may be mailed in duplicate

to: Federal Aviation Administration,

Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel,

Attn: Rules Docket (ANM–7), Docket

No. NM–120, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,

Renton, Washington, 98055–4056; or

delivered in duplicate to the Office of

the Assistant Chief Counsel at the above

address. Comments must be marked

‘‘Docket No. NM–120.’’ Comments may

be inspected in the Rules Docket

weekdays, except Federal holidays,

between 7:30 and 4:00 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William Schroeder, FAA,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue

SW., Renton, Washington, 98055–4056,

telephone (206) 227–2148.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

The FAA has determined that good

cause exists for making these special

conditions effective upon issuance;

however, interested persons are invited

to submit such written data, views, or

arguments as they may desire.

Communications should identify the

regulatory docket and special conditions

number and be submitted in duplicate

to the address specified above. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments will be

considered by the Administrator. These

special conditions may be changed in

light of the comments received. All

comments submitted will be available in

the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons, both before and after

the closing date for comments. A report

summarizing each substantive public

contact with FAA personnel concerning

this rulemaking will be filed in the

docket. Persons wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this request

must submit with those comments a

self-addressed, stamped postcard on

which the following statement is made:

‘‘Comments to Docket No. NM–120.’’

The postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Background

On May 24, 1989, British Aerospace

Public Limited Company (BAe)

(currently Jetstream Aircraft Ltd.)

applied for a type certificate for the BAe

Model 4100 (currently Jetstream Model

4101) airplane in the transport airplane

category. The Jetstream Model 4101 is a

transport category airplane powered by

two Garrett TPE331–14GR/HR Series

turbo-propeller engines mounted on the

wing. McCauley Model B/C

5JFR36C1101/2 or 3/4–/L114 G/H CA–0

five-blade propellers are installed. The

airplane is type certificated with two

flight crewmembers and up to 30

passengers.

The Jetstream Model 4101 will

incorporate an unusual design feature,

the Automatic Takeoff Thrust Control

System (ATTCS), referred to by

Jetstream as Automatic Power Reserve

or APR, to show compliance with the

approach climb requirements of

§ 25.121(d). Appendix I to part 25 limits

the application of performance credit for

ATTCS to takeoff only. Since the

airworthiness regulations do not contain

appropriate safety standards for

approach climb performance using

ATTCS, special conditions are required

to ensure a level of safety equivalent to

that established in the regulations.

Type Certification Basis

Under the provisions of § 21.101,

Jetstream must show that the Model

4101 series airplanes, as changed,

continues to meet the applicable

provisions of the regulations

incorporated by reference in Type

Certificate No. A41NM or the applicable

regulations in effect on the date of

application for the change. The

regulations incorporated by reference in

the type certificate are commonly

referred to as the ‘‘original type

certification basis.’’ The regulations

incorporated by reference in Type

Certificate No. A41NM are as follows:

Based on §§ 21.29 and 21.17 and the

type certification application date, the

applicable U.S. type certification basis

for the Model 4101 was established as

follows:

—Part 25 of the FAR dated February 1,

1965, as amended by Amendments

25–1 through 25–66 (all based on BAe

application date to CAA), and

—Part 25 of the FAR, Amendments 25–

67, 25–68, 25–69, 25–70, 25–71, and

—Part 25 of the FAR, §§ 25.361 and

25.729 and paragraphs 25.571(e)(2),

25.773(b)(2) and 25.905(d), all as

amended by Amendment 25–72, and

—Section 25.1419 as amended by

Amendments 25–1 through 25–66,

and

—Special Conditions (SC) as follows:

—Special Conditions No. 25–ANM–48

issued August 29, 1991, Lightning and

High Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF)

—Special Conditions No. 25–ANM–45

issued July 9, 1991, Cabin Aisle

Width, and

—The following exemptions were

petitioned for and granted:

—FAA Exemption No. 5587 issued

January 13, 1993, Head Impact

Criteria (25.562(c)(5)) for the three

most forward passenger seats in

passenger cabin, and

—Equivalent safety findings as follows:

—25.349 of the FAR, Rolling Conditions