80 FR 39381 - Privacy Act; Implementation
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 131 (July 9, 2015)
Office of the Secretary
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 131 (July 9, 2015)
| Page Range | 39381-39382 | |
| FR Document | 2015-16575 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 131 (Thursday, July 9, 2015)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 39381-39382] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-16575] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary 32 CFR Part 323 [Docket ID: DoD-2015-OS-0063] Privacy Act; Implementation AGENCY: Defense Logistics Agency, DoD. ACTION: Direct final rule with request for comments. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) is exempting records maintained in the system of records notice S240.28 DoD, Case Adjudication Tracking System (CATS) from pertinent provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974. In this rulemaking, the DLA is exempting portions of this system of records from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act because of criminal, civil and administrative enforcement requirements. DATES: The rule will be effective on September 17, 2015 unless adverse comments are received by September 8, 2015. If adverse comment is received, the Department of Defense will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the Federal Register. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods: * Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. * Mail: Department of Defense, Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer, Directorate of Oversight and Compliance, Regulatory and Audit Matters Office, 9010 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301- 9010. Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. LaDonne L. White (703) 767-5045. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This direct final rule makes non-substantive changes to the DLA Program rules. This will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of DoD's program by ensuring the integrity of the security and counterintelligence records by the DLA and the Department of Defense. This rule is being published as a direct final rule as the Department of Defense does not expect to receive any adverse comments, and so a proposed rule is unnecessary. Direct Final Rule and Significant Adverse Comments DoD has determined this rulemaking meets the criteria for a direct final rule because it involves nonsubstantive changes dealing with DoD's management of its Privacy Programs. DoD expects no opposition to the changes and no significant adverse comments. However, if DoD receives a significant adverse comment, the Department will withdraw this direct final rule by publishing a notice in the Federal Register. A significant adverse comment is one that explains: (1) Why the direct final rule is inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach; or (2) why the direct final rule will be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. In determining whether a comment necessitates withdrawal of this direct final rule, DoD will consider whether it warrants a substantive response in a notice and comment process. Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' and Executive Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'' It has been determined that Privacy Act rules for the Department of Defense are not significant rules. This rule does not (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy; a sector of the economy; productivity; competition; jobs; the environment; public health or safety; or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another Agency; (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in these Executive orders. Public Law 96-354, ``Regulatory Flexibility Act'' (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6) It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule does not have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because it is concerned only with the administration of Privacy Act systems of records within the Department of Defense. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required. Public Law 96-511, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule does not impose additional information collection requirements on the public under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Section 202, Public Law 104-4, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act'' It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule does not involve a Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more and that this rulemaking will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism'' It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule does not have federalism implications. This rule does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, no Federalism assessment is required. List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 323 Privacy. Accordingly, 32 CFR part 323 is amended as follows: PART 323--DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY PRIVACY PROGRAM 0 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 323 continues to read as follows: Authority: Pub. L. 93-579, Stat. 1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a). 0 2. In Sec. 323.6, add paragraph (j) to read as follows: [[Page 39382]] Sec. 323.6 Exemption rules. * * * * * (j) System identifier: S240.28 DoD (Specific exemption). (1) System name: Case Adjudication Tracking System (CATS) (2) Exemption: (i) Investigatory material compiled solely for the purpose of determining suitability, eligibility, or qualifications for federal civilian employment, federal contracts, or access to classified information may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5), but only to the extent that such material would reveal the identity of a confidential source. (ii) Therefore, portions of this system may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5) from the following subsections of 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), (d)(1)(2)(3)(4), and (e)(1). (3) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5). (4) Reasons: (i) From 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (d)(1)(2)(3)(4), when access to accounting disclosures and access to or amendment of records would cause the identity of a confidential source to be revealed. Disclosure of the confidential source's identity not only will result in the Department breaching the express promise of confidentiality made to the source but it would impair the Department's future ability to compile investigatory material for the purpose of determining suitability, eligibility, or qualifications for Federal civilian employment, Federal contracts, or access to classified information. Unless sources may be assured that a promise of confidentiality will be honored, they will be less likely to provide information considered essential to the Department in making the required determinations. (ii) From 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(1), as in the collection of information for investigatory purposes, it is not always possible to determine the relevance and necessity of particular information in the early stages of the investigation. In some cases, it is only after the information is evaluated in light of other information that its relevance and necessity becomes clear. Such information permits more informed decision-making by the Department when making required suitability, eligibility, and qualification determinations. Dated: June 22, 2015. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. 2015-16575 Filed 7-8-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 131 / Thursday, July 9, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 39381
§ 213.6 Information concerning docket number for this Federal Register inconsistency or otherwise interfere
assistance. document. The general policy for with an action taken or planned by
Any person may contact the Office comments and other submissions from another Agency; (3) Materially alter the
with questions regarding eligibility for members of the public is to make these budgetary impact of entitlements,
technical assistance. Summaries of the submissions available for public grants, user fees, or loan programs, or
trade laws and the SBA size standards viewing on the Internet at http:// the rights and obligations of recipients
can be obtained by writing to the Trade www.regulations.gov as they are thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy
Remedy Assistance Office, U.S. received without change, including any issues arising out of legal mandates, the
International Trade Commission, 500 E personal identifiers or contact President’s priorities, or the principles
Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. information. set forth in these Executive orders.
Information is also provided on the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Commission’s Web site at http:// Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory
LaDonne L. White (703) 767–5045. Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6)
www.usitc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This It has been determined that this
By order of the Commission. direct final rule makes non-substantive Privacy Act rule does not have
Issued: June 29, 2015. changes to the DLA Program rules. This significant economic impact on a
William R. Bishop, will improve the efficiency and substantial number of small entities
Supervisory Hearings and Information effectiveness of DoD’s program by because it is concerned only with the
Officer. ensuring the integrity of the security administration of Privacy Act systems of
[FR Doc. 2015–16435 Filed 7–8–15; 8:45 am] and counterintelligence records by the records within the Department of
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DLA and the Department of Defense. Defense. A Regulatory Flexibility
This rule is being published as a Analysis is not required.
direct final rule as the Department of
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense does not expect to receive any Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork
adverse comments, and so a proposed Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
Office of the Secretary rule is unnecessary. It has been determined that this
Direct Final Rule and Significant Privacy Act rule does not impose
32 CFR Part 323 additional information collection
Adverse Comments
[Docket ID: DoD–2015–OS–0063] requirements on the public under the
DoD has determined this rulemaking Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Privacy Act; Implementation meets the criteria for a direct final rule
because it involves nonsubstantive Section 202, Public Law 104–4,
AGENCY: Defense Logistics Agency, DoD. changes dealing with DoD’s ‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’
ACTION: Direct final rule with request for management of its Privacy Programs. It has been determined that this
comments. DoD expects no opposition to the Privacy Act rule does not involve a
changes and no significant adverse Federal mandate that may result in the
SUMMARY: Defense Logistics Agency comments. However, if DoD receives a expenditure by State, local and tribal
(DLA) is exempting records maintained significant adverse comment, the governments, in the aggregate, or by the
in the system of records notice S240.28 Department will withdraw this direct private sector, of $100 million or more
DoD, Case Adjudication Tracking final rule by publishing a notice in the and that this rulemaking will not
System (CATS) from pertinent Federal Register. A significant adverse significantly or uniquely affect small
provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974. In comment is one that explains: (1) Why governments.
this rulemaking, the DLA is exempting the direct final rule is inappropriate,
portions of this system of records from Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’
including challenges to the rule’s
one or more provisions of the Privacy underlying premise or approach; or (2) It has been determined that this
Act because of criminal, civil and why the direct final rule will be Privacy Act rule does not have
administrative enforcement ineffective or unacceptable without a federalism implications. This rule does
requirements. change. In determining whether a not have substantial direct effects on the
DATES: The rule will be effective on comment necessitates withdrawal of States, on the relationship between the
September 17, 2015 unless adverse this direct final rule, DoD will consider National Government and the States, or
comments are received by September 8, whether it warrants a substantive on the distribution of power and
2015. If adverse comment is received, response in a notice and comment responsibilities among the various
the Department of Defense will publish process. levels of government. Therefore, no
a timely withdrawal of the rule in the Federalism assessment is required.
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Federal Register. List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 323
Planning and Review’’ and Executive
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation Privacy.
identified by docket number and title, and Regulatory Review’’
by any of the following methods: Accordingly, 32 CFR part 323 is
* Federal Rulemaking Portal: http:// It has been determined that Privacy amended as follows:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the Act rules for the Department of Defense
instructions for submitting comments. are not significant rules. This rule does PART 323—DEFENSE LOGISTICS
not (1) Have an annual effect on the AGENCY PRIVACY PROGRAM
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
* Mail: Department of Defense, Office
of the Deputy Chief Management economy of $100 million or more or
■ 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR
Officer, Directorate of Oversight and adversely affect in a material way the
part 323 continues to read as follows:
Compliance, Regulatory and Audit economy; a sector of the economy;
Matters Office, 9010 Defense Pentagon, productivity; competition; jobs; the Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, Stat. 1896 (5
Washington, DC 20301–9010. environment; public health or safety; or U.S.C. 552a).
Instructions: All submissions received State, local, or tribal governments or ■ 2. In § 323.6, add paragraph (j) to read
must include the agency name and communities; (2) Create a serious as follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:07 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09JYR1.SGM 09JYR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_39512/page/1.svg)
![39382 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 131 / Thursday, July 9, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
§ 323.6 Exemption rules. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND PATCOM may be contacted on Channel
* * * * * SECURITY 16 (156.8 MHZ) by the call sign ‘‘Coast
(j) System identifier: S240.28 DoD Guard Patrol Commander.’’ Vessels,
(Specific exemption). Coast Guard permitted to transit the regulated area,
will operate at no wake speed and in a
(1) System name: Case Adjudication 33 CFR Part 100 manner which will not endanger
Tracking System (CATS)
[Docket No. USCG–2012–0403] participants in the event or any other
(2) Exemption: (i) Investigatory craft. The rules contained above shall
material compiled solely for the purpose RIN 1625–AA08 not apply to participants in the event or
of determining suitability, eligibility, or vessels of the patrol operating in the
qualifications for federal civilian Special Local Regulations; Marine performance of their assigned duties.
employment, federal contracts, or access Events; Annual Bayview Mackinac In the event this special local
to classified information may be exempt Race regulation affects shipping, commercial
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5), but only AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. vessels may request permission from the
to the extent that such material would PATCOM to transit the area of the event
ACTION: Notice of enforcement of
reveal the identity of a confidential by hailing call sign ‘‘Coast Guard Patrol
regulation.
source. Commander’’ on VHF Channel 16 (156.8
(ii) Therefore, portions of this system SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce MHZ).
may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. the special local regulation for the This document is issued under the
552a(k)(5) from the following annual Bayview Mackinac Race, from 9 authority of 33 CFR 100.902 and 5
subsections of 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), a.m. to 5 p.m. on July 20, 2013. This U.S.C. 552(a). If the District
(d)(1)(2)(3)(4), and (e)(1). special local regulated is necessary to Commander, Captain of the Port or
(3) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5). safely control vessel movements in the PATCOM determines that the regulated
vicinity of the race and provide for the area need not be enforced for the full
(4) Reasons: (i) From 5 U.S.C.
safety of the general boating public and duration stated in this notice, he or she
552a(c)(3) and (d)(1)(2)(3)(4), when
commercial shipping. During this may use a Broadcast Notice to Mariners
access to accounting disclosures and
period, no person or vessel may enter to grant general permission to enter the
access to or amendment of records
the regulated area without the regulated area.
would cause the identity of a
permission of the Coast Guard Patrol Dated: June 11, 2015.
confidential source to be revealed.
Commander (PATCOM).
Disclosure of the confidential source’s Scott E. Anderson,
DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR
identity not only will result in the Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting District
Department breaching the express 100.902 will be enforced from 7 a.m. Prevention, Ninth Coast Guard District.
promise of confidentiality made to the until 6 p.m. on July 18, 2015. [FR Doc. 2015–16522 Filed 7–8–15; 8:45 am]
source but it would impair the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
Department’s future ability to compile LTJG Matthew Stroebel, Waterway
investigatory material for the purpose of Management Branch, Ninth Coast Guard
determining suitability, eligibility, or District, 1240 East 9th Street, Cleveland, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
qualifications for Federal civilian OH at (216) 902–6060. SECURITY
employment, Federal contracts, or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast
access to classified information. Unless Guard will enforce the special local Coast Guard
sources may be assured that a promise regulation for the annual Bayview
of confidentiality will be honored, they Mackinac Race from 7 a.m. until 6 p.m. 33 CFR Part 117
will be less likely to provide on July 18, 2015. This Notice of [Docket No. USCG–2015–0578]
information considered essential to the Enforcement applies to all U.S.
Department in making the required navigable waters of the Black River, St. Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
determinations. Clair River, and lower Lake Huron, Saugus River, Saugus, Massachusetts
(ii) From 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(1), as in the bound by a line starting at latitude
042°58′47″ N., longitude 082°26′0″ W.; AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
collection of information for
investigatory purposes, it is not always then easterly to latitude 042°58′24″ N., ACTION:Notice of deviation from
possible to determine the relevance and longitude 082°24′47″ W.; then drawbridge regulation.
necessity of particular information in northward along the International
Boundary to latitude 043°02′48″ N., SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a
the early stages of the investigation. In temporary deviation from the operating
some cases, it is only after the longitude 082°23′47″ W.; then westerly
to the shoreline at approximate location schedule that governs the Saugus RR
information is evaluated in light of other Bridge, across the Saugus River, mile
information that its relevance and latitude 043°02′48″ N., longitude
082°26′48″ W.; then southward along 2.1, at Saugus, Massachusetts. This
necessity becomes clear. Such deviation is necessary to facilitate
information permits more informed the U.S. shoreline to latitude 042°58′54″
N., longitude 082°26′01″ W.; then back essential maintenance repairs. This
decision-making by the Department deviation allows the bridge to remain in
when making required suitability, to the beginning [DATUM: NAD 83].
In order to ensure the safety of the closed position during the
eligibility, and qualification maintenance repairs.
spectators and participating vessels, the
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
determinations. DATES: This deviation is effective from
Coast Guard will patrol the race area
Dated: June 22, 2015. under the direction of a designated 12:01 a.m. on September 12 to 11:59
Aaron Siegel, Coast Guard Patrol Commander p.m. on September 13, 2015.
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison (PATCOM). Vessels desiring to transit ADDRESSES: The docket for this
Officer, Department of Defense. the regulated area may do so only with deviation, [USCG–2015–0578] is
[FR Doc. 2015–16575 Filed 7–8–15; 8:45 am] prior approval of the PATCOM and available at http://www.regulations.gov.
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P when so directed by that officer. The Type the docket number in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:07 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09JYR1.SGM 09JYR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_39512/page/2.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-23 09:14:25
Document Modified: 2018-02-23 09:14:25
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Direct final rule with request for comments. | |
| Dates | The rule will be effective on September 17, 2015 unless adverse comments are received by September 8, 2015. If adverse comment is received, the Department of Defense will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the Federal Register. | |
| Contact | Mr. LaDonne L. White (703) 767-5045. | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 39381 |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR