Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Entitled Access Certificates for Electronic Services (ACES) Program
Federal RegisterFeb 16, 1999
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Entitled Access
Certificates for Electronic Services (ACES) Program
AGENCY: Federal Technology Service, GSA.
ACTION: Notice of request for approval of a new information collection
entitled Access Certificates for Electronic Services (ACES) Program.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35), the Federal Technology Service (FTS) is publishing a
summary of a proposed new information collection activity for public
and agency comment. The proposed information collection activity is
designed to support a new FTS program entitled Access Certificates for
Electronic Services (ACES). The ACES Program is intended to facilitate
and promote secure electronic communications between on-line automated
information technology application systems authorized by law to
participate in the ACES Program and users who elect to participate in
the program, through the implementation and operation of digital
signature certificate technologies. Individual digital signature
certificates will be issued at no cost to individuals based upon their
presentation of verifiable proof of identity to an authorized ACES
Registration Authority. Business Representative digital signature
certificates will be issued to individuals based upon their
presentation of verifiable proof of identity and verifiable proof of
authority from the claimed entity to an authorized ACES Registration
Authority. If authorized by law, a fee may be charged for issuance of a
Business Representative certificate. The information collection was
previously published in the Federal Register on December 7, 1999 at 63
FR 67484, allowing for a 60-day comment period. No comments were
received.
DATES: Submit comments on or before March 18, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect
of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing
this burden, should be submitted to: Edward Springer, GSA Desk Officer,
Room 3235, NEOB, Washington, DC 20503, and may also be addressed to
Stanley Choffrey, General Services Administration, Federal Technology
Service, Office of Information Security, Room 5060, 7th and D Streets,
SW, Washington, DC 20407.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley Choffrey, General Services
Administration, Federal Technology Service, Office of Information
Security at (202) 708-7943, or by e-mail to [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Purpose
The purpose of this Notice is to consult with and solicit comments
from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed
collection of information under the ACES Program in order to:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of GSA, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of
the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
[[Page 7651]]
(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to response.
Comments relating to any additional aspects and features of the
ACES Program are also welcomed, and will be carefully considered.
B. Annual Reporting Burden
Respondents: 1,000,000; annual responses: 1,000,000; average hours
per response: .15; burden hours: 250,000.
Copy of Proposal
A copy of this proposal may be obtained by contacting Stanley
Choffrey at the above address.
Dated: February 9, 1999.
Edward C. Loeb,
Acting Deputy Associate Administrator for Acquisition Policy.
[FR Doc. 99-3571 Filed 2-12-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-61-M
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.