83 FR 42234 - Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 162 (August 21, 2018)
Office of the Secretary
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 162 (August 21, 2018)
| Page Range | 42234-42235 | |
| FR Document | 2018-17954 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 21, 2018)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 42234-42235] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-17954] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary 32 CFR Part 311 [Docket ID: DOD-2018-OS-0055] Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of Defense, DoD. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Office of the Secretary of Defense proposes to exempt some records maintained in DMDC 18 DoD, ``Synchronized Predeployment and Operational Tracker Enterprise Suite (SPOT-ES) Records,'' from subsection (d) of the Privacy Act. A system of records notice for this system has been published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register. DATES: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(1), (2) and (3), the public is given a 30-day period in which to comment. Therefore, please submit any comments by September 20, 2018. 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 Chief Management Officer, Directorate for Oversight and Compliance, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Mailbox #24, Suite 08D09, Alexandria, VA 22350-1700. 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: Ms. Luz D. Ortiz, Chief, Records, Privacy and Declassification Division (RPDD), 1155 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20311-1155, or by phone at (571) 372-0478. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This proposed modification to 32 CFR part 311 adds a new Privacy Act exemption rule for the Synchronized Redeployment and Operational Tracker Enterprise Suite (SPOT-ES), which is used at installations to manage, track, account for, monitor, and report on contracts, companies, and contractor employees supporting contingency operations, humanitarian assistance operations, peace operations, disaster relief operations, military exercises, events, and other activities that require contractor support. Contract scope, installations, and/or activities requiring contractor support as documented in SPOT-ES may be classified under Executive Order (E.O.) 13526, ``Classified National Security Information.'' Information classified under E.O. 13526, as implemented by DoD Manual (DoDM) 5200.01 Volume 1, and DoD Instruction (DoDI) 5200.01, may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1). Granting unfettered access to information that is properly classified pursuant to those authorities may cause damage to the national security. Regulatory Procedures Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' and Executive Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'' Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distribute impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 also emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule is not a significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866. Executive Order 13771, ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs'' This proposed rule is not a deregulatory action but a modification to an existing rule. 2 U.S.C. Ch. 25, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act'' This proposed rule is not subject to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1532) because it does not contain a federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100M or more in any one year. Public Law 96-354, ``Regulatory Flexibility Act'' (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6) It has been certified that this rule does not have a 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 DoD. 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 rule does not impose additional information collection requirements on the public under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism'' Executive Order 13132 establishes certain requirements that an agency must meet when it promulgates a proposed rule (and subsequent final rule) that imposes substantial direct requirement costs on State and local governments, preempts State law, or otherwise has Federalism implications. This proposed rule will not have a substantial effect on State and local governments. List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 311 Privacy. Accordingly, 32 CFR part 311 is proposed to be amended as follows: PART 311--[AMENDED] 0 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 311 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a. 0 2. Section 311.8 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(28) to read as follows: Sec. 311.8 Procedures for exemptions. * * * * * (c) * * * [[Page 42235]] (28) System identifier and name: DMDC 18 DoD, Synchronized Predeployment and Operational Tracker Enterprise Suite (SPOT-ES) Records. (i) Exemption: Information classified under E.O. 13526, as implemented by DoD 5200.1-R, may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1). (ii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1). (iii) Reasons: From subsection 5 U.S.C. 552a(d) because granting access to information that is properly classified pursuant to E.O. 13526, as implemented by DoD Manual 5200.01 Volume 1, and DoD Instruction 5200.01, may cause damage to the national security. Dated: August 15, 2018. Aaron T. Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. 2018-17954 Filed 8-20-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
![42234 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 162 / Tuesday, August 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules
10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX Mailbox #24, Suite 08D09, Alexandria, flexibility. This rule is not a significant
76177; telephone (817) 222–5110; email 9- VA 22350–1700. regulatory action under E.O. 12866.
ASW-FTW-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov. Instructions: All submissions received
(2) For operations conducted under a 14 must include the agency name and Executive Order 13771, ‘‘Reducing
CFR part 119 operating certificate or under docket number for this Federal Register Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that Costs’’
you notify your principal inspector, or
document. The general policy for
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of comments and other submissions from This proposed rule is not a
the local flight standards district office or members of the public is to make these deregulatory action but a modification
certificate holding district office before submissions available for public to an existing rule.
operating any aircraft complying with this viewing on the internet at http://
AD through an AMOC. www.regulations.gov as they are 2 U.S.C. Ch. 25, ‘‘Unfunded Mandates
received without change, including any Reform Act’’
(h) Additional Information
personal identifiers or contact This proposed rule is not subject to
The subject of this AD is addressed in information.
Transport Canada AD No. CF–2016–13, dated
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
May 16, 2016. You may view the Transport FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1532) because it does
Canada AD on the internet at http:// Luz D. Ortiz, Chief, Records, Privacy not contain a federal mandate that may
www.regulations.gov in the AD Docket. and Declassification Division (RPDD), result in the expenditure by state, local,
1155 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
(i) Subject
20311–1155, or by phone at (571) 372– or by the private sector, of $100M or
Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) more in any one year.
Code: 6300, Main Rotor Drive System.
0478.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on August 10, proposed modification to 32 CFR part
2018. Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6)
311 adds a new Privacy Act exemption
Lance T. Gant, rule for the Synchronized It has been certified that this rule does
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Redeployment and Operational Tracker not have a significant economic impact
Division, Aircraft Certification Service. Enterprise Suite (SPOT–ES), which is on a substantial number of small entities
[FR Doc. 2018–17902 Filed 8–20–18; 8:45 am] used at installations to manage, track, because it is concerned only with the
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P account for, monitor, and report on administration of Privacy Act systems of
contracts, companies, and contractor records within DoD. A Regulatory
employees supporting contingency Flexibility Analysis is not required.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE operations, humanitarian assistance Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork
operations, peace operations, disaster Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
Office of the Secretary relief operations, military exercises,
events, and other activities that require It has been determined that this rule
32 CFR Part 311 contractor support. Contract scope, does not impose additional information
installations, and/or activities requiring collection requirements on the public
[Docket ID: DOD–2018–OS–0055] under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
contractor support as documented in
SPOT–ES may be classified under 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation
Executive Order (E.O.) 13526, Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of ‘‘Classified National Security
Defense, DoD. Information.’’ Information classified Executive Order 13132 establishes
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. under E.O. 13526, as implemented by certain requirements that an agency
DoD Manual (DoDM) 5200.01 Volume 1, must meet when it promulgates a
SUMMARY: The Office of the Secretary of and DoD Instruction (DoDI) 5200.01, proposed rule (and subsequent final
Defense proposes to exempt some may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. rule) that imposes substantial direct
records maintained in DMDC 18 DoD, 552a(k)(1). Granting unfettered access to requirement costs on State and local
‘‘Synchronized Predeployment and information that is properly classified governments, preempts State law, or
Operational Tracker Enterprise Suite pursuant to those authorities may cause otherwise has Federalism implications.
(SPOT–ES) Records,’’ from subsection damage to the national security. This proposed rule will not have a
(d) of the Privacy Act. A system of substantial effect on State and local
records notice for this system has been Regulatory Procedures governments.
published elsewhere in this issue of the Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 311
Federal Register. Planning and Review’’ and Executive
DATES: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation Privacy.
553(b)(1), (2) and (3), the public is given and Regulatory Review’’ Accordingly, 32 CFR part 311 is
a 30-day period in which to comment. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 proposed to be amended as follows:
Therefore, please submit any comments direct agencies to assess all costs and
by September 20, 2018. PART 311—[AMENDED]
benefits of available regulatory
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, alternatives and, if regulation is ■ 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR
identified by docket number and title, necessary, to select regulatory
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
part 311 continues to read as follows:
by any of the following methods: approaches that maximize net benefits
• Federal Rulemaking Portal: http:// (including potential economic, Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a.
www.regulations.gov. Follow the environmental, public health and safety ■ 2. Section 311.8 is amended by adding
instructions for submitting comments. effects, distribute impacts, and equity). paragraph (c)(28) to read as follows:
• Mail: Department of Defense, Office Executive Order 13563 also emphasizes
of the Chief Management Officer, the importance of quantifying both costs § 311.8 Procedures for exemptions.
Directorate for Oversight and and benefits, of reducing costs, of * * * * *
Compliance, 4800 Mark Center Drive, harmonizing rules, and of promoting (c) * * *
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:34 Aug 20, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM 21AUP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_42396/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 162 / Tuesday, August 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules 42235
(28) System identifier and name: EPA–R05–OAR–2017–0165 (SO2 rule The following outline is provided to
DMDC 18 DoD, Synchronized revisions) at http://www.regulations.gov, aid in locating information regarding
Predeployment and Operational Tracker or via email to Blakley.pamela@epa.gov. EPA’s proposed action on Ohio’s Lake
Enterprise Suite (SPOT–ES) Records. For comments submitted at County SO2 nonattainment plan.
(i) Exemption: Information classified Regulations.gov, follow the online
under E.O. 13526, as implemented by Table of Contents
instructions for submitting comments.
DoD 5200.1–R, may be exempt pursuant Once submitted, comments cannot be I. Why was Ohio required to submit an SO2
to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1). edited or removed from Regulations.gov. plan for the Lake County area?
(ii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1). For either manner of submission, EPA II. Requirements for SO2 Nonattainment Area
(iii) Reasons: From subsection 5 Plans
may publish any comment received to III. Attainment Demonstration and Longer-
U.S.C. 552a(d) because granting access its public docket. Do not submit Term Averaging
to information that is properly classified electronically any information you IV. Review of Modeled Attainment Plan
pursuant to E.O. 13526, as implemented consider to be Confidential Business A. Model Selection and General Model
by DoD Manual 5200.01 Volume 1, and Information (CBI) or other information Inputs
DoD Instruction 5200.01, may cause whose disclosure is restricted by statute. B. Meteorological Data
damage to the national security. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, C. Modeled Emissions Data
Dated: August 15, 2018. etc.) must be accompanied by a written D. Emission Limits
1. Enforceability
Aaron T. Siegel, comment. The written comment is 2. Longer-Term Average Limits
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison considered the official comment and E. Background Concentrations
Officer, Department of Defense. should include discussion of all points F. Summary of Results
[FR Doc. 2018–17954 Filed 8–20–18; 8:45 am] you wish to make. EPA will generally V. Review of Other Plan Requirements
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P not consider comments or comment A. Emissions Inventory
contents located outside of the primary B. Reasonably Available Control Measures
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or and Technology
other file sharing system). For C. New Source Review
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION D. Reasonable Further Progress
AGENCY additional submission methods, please
E. Contingency Measures
contact the person identified in the FOR VI. Ohio’s SIP Rules
40 CFR Part 52 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. VII. EPA’s Proposed Action
For the full EPA public comment policy, VIII. Incorporation by Reference
[EPA–R05–OAR–2015–0699; EPA–R05– information about CBI or multimedia
OAR–2017–0165; FRL–9982–31-Region 5] XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit I. Why was Ohio required to submit an
Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Attainment SO2 plan for the Lake County area?
Plan for the Lake County SO2 http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
Nonattainment Area commenting-epa-dockets. On June 22, 2010, EPA promulgated a
new 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS of 75
AGENCY: Environmental Protection FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
parts per billion (ppb), which is met at
Agency (EPA). Mary Portanova, Environmental
an ambient air quality monitoring site
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air
ACTION: Proposed rule. when the 3-year average of the annual
Programs Branch (AR–18J),
99th percentile of the daily maximum 1-
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency,
hour average concentrations does not
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
exceed 75 ppb, as determined in
State Implementation Plan (SIP) Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–5954,
accordance with appendix T of 40 CFR
revision which Ohio submitted to EPA portanova.mary@epa.gov.
part 50. See 75 FR 35520, codified at 40
on April 3, 2015, and supplemented in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: CFR 50.17(a)–(b). The 3-year average of
October 2015 and March 2017, as its Throughout this document, whenever the annual 99th percentile of daily
plan for attaining the 1-hour sulfur ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ’’our’’ is used, we mean maximum 1-hour average
dioxide (SO2) primary national ambient EPA. The docket number EPA–R05– concentrations is called the air quality
air quality standard (NAAQS) for the OAR–2015–0699 refers to Ohio’s monitor’s SO2 ‘‘design value.’’ For the 3-
Lake County SO2 nonattainment area. nonattainment SIP submittal of April 3, year period 2009–2011, the design value
This plan (herein called a 2015, supplemented on October 13, at the SO2 monitor in Painesville, Lake
‘‘nonattainment plan’’) includes Ohio’s 2015. This state submittal addressed County (39–085–0007) was 157 ppb,
attainment demonstration, enforceable Ohio’s Lake County, Muskingum River, which is a violation of the SO2 NAAQS.
emission limitations and control and Steubenville OH–WV SO2 Lake County’s SO2 designation was
measures, and other elements required nonattainment areas. The docket based upon the monitored design value
under the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA number EPA–R05–OAR–2017–0165 at this location for this three-year
proposes to conclude that Ohio has refers to Ohio’s OAC 3745–18 SO2 rules period. (Lake County’s other SO2
appropriately demonstrated that the SIP submittal of March 13, 2017. EPA is monitor, located in Eastlake, Ohio (39–
nonattainment plan provides for proposing action on only the Lake 085–0003), had a 2009–2011 design
attainment of the 2010 1-hour primary County portion of Ohio’s nonattainment value of 33 ppb, which is not a
SO2 NAAQS in Lake County by the SIP submittal and the portions of OAC violation.) On August 5, 2013, EPA
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
applicable attainment date and that the 3745–18 that are specifically pertinent designated a first set of 29 areas of the
plan meets the other applicable to Ohio’s Lake County nonattainment country as nonattainment for the 2010
requirements under the CAA. SIP at this time. The Muskingum River SO2 NAAQS, including the Lake County
DATES: Comments must be received on and Steubenville portions of the nonattainment area. See 78 FR 47191,
or before September 20, 2018. nonattainment SIP and the remainder of codified at 40 CFR part 81, subpart C.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, the OAC 3745–18 rule revisions will be These area designations were effective
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– addressed in subsequent rulemaking on October 4, 2013. Section 191(a) of the
OAR–2015–0699 (nonattainment SIP) or actions. CAA directs states to submit SIPs for
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:34 Aug 20, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM 21AUP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_42396/page/2.svg)
Document Created: 2018-08-21 00:06:46
Document Modified: 2018-08-21 00:06:46
| 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 | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Notice of proposed rulemaking. | |
| Dates | In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(1), (2) and (3), the public is given a 30-day period in which to comment. Therefore, please submit any comments by September 20, 2018. | |
| Contact | Ms. Luz D. Ortiz, Chief, Records, Privacy and Declassification Division (RPDD), 1155 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20311-1155, or by phone at (571) 372-0478. | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 42234 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR