Privacy Act; Implementation, 38009-38010 [05-12999]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
(19) From that point, proceed eastsoutheasterly in a straight line to the
1,680-foot benchmark in section 17,
T7N/R29E, on the Johnson Butte map,
and continue east-northeasterly in a
straight line through the 2,043-foot peak
of Johnson Butte in section 16, T7N/
R29E, to the 2,220-foot peak of Jump Off
Joe summit in section 12, T7N/R29E;
then
(20) From that point, proceed
southeasterly in a straight line, through
the Nine Canyon map, to the 343-foot
benchmark on the bank of the Columbia
River at Palmer Pond in section 13,
T6N/R30E, on the Wallula map; and
then
(21) Follow the north bank of the
Columbia River westerly (downstream),
through the Juniper Canyon, Juniper,
and the Hat Rock maps, to the beginning
point at the intersection of Interstate
Highway 82 and the north bank of the
Columbia River on the Umatilla map.
Signed: May 17, 2005.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
Approved: May 27, 2005.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and
Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 05–13039 Filed 6–30–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Security Service
32 CFR Part 321
[DSS Regulation 01–13–R]
Privacy Act; Implementation
Defense Security Service, DoD.
Final Rule/Transfer.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Defense Security Service
(DSS) is adding an exemption rule for
the system of records V5–05, entitled
‘Joint Personnel Adjudication System
(JPAS)’. The system of records is being
transferred from the Department of the
Air Force’s inventory (F031 DoD A,
entitled ‘Joint Personnel Adjudication
System (JPAS)’) to the DSS inventory of
records. The exemption rule (32 CFR
part 806b) for the Air Force system is
being transferred and published as an
exemption rule (32 CFR part 321.13) for
the DSS system.
The rule was published as a final rule
on May 9, 2003 at 68 FR 24881.
DATES: Effective July 1, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Defense Security Service,
Chief Information Officer/Chief
Operating Officer, 1340 Braddock Place,
Alexandria, VA 22314–1651.
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:59 Jun 30, 2005
Jkt 205001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr.
Leslie R. Blake at (703) 325–9450.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’
It has been determined that Privacy
Act rules for the Department of Defense
are not significant rules. The rules do
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 this Executive order.
Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory
Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6)
It has been certified that Privacy Act
rules for the Department of Defense do
not have significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities
because they are concerned only with
the administration of Privacy Act
systems of records within the
Department of Defense.
Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork
Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been certified that Privacy Act
rules for the Department of Defense
impose no information requirements
beyond the Department of Defense and
that the information collected within
the Department of Defense is necessary
and consistent with 5 U.S.C. 552a,
known as the Privacy Act of 1974.
Section 202, Public Law 104–4,
‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’
It has been certified that the Privacy
Act rulemaking for the Department of
Defense 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 such rulemaking will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments.
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’
It has been certified that the Privacy
Act rules for the Department of Defense
do not have federalism implications.
The rules do not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
38009
between the National Government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 321
Privacy.
I Accordingly, 32 CFR part 321 is to be
amended to read as follows:
PART 321—DEFENSE SECURITY
SERVICE PRIVACY PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR
part 321 continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5
U.S.C. 552a).
2. Section 321.13 is amended by
adding paragraph (h) to read as follows:
I
§ 321.13
Exemptions.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) System identifier: V5–05.
(1) System name: Joint Personnel
Adjudication System (JPAS).
(2) Exemption: (i) 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 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
of records 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),
and (e)(1).
(3) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5).
(4) Reasons: (i) From subsections
(c)(3) and (d) 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 source’s identity not
only will result in the Department
breaching the promise of confidentiality
made to the source but it will 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 can 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 subsection (e)(1) because in
the collection of information for
investigatory purpose, it is not always
possible to determine the relevance and
necessity of particular information in
the early stages of the investigation. It is
only after the information is evaluated
E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM
01JYR1
38010
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 126 / Friday, July 1, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
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 23, 2005.
Jeannette Owings-Ballard,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer,
Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 05–12999 Filed 6–30–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 100
[CGD11–05–010]
RIN 1625–AA08
Special Local Regulations for Marine
Events; Humboldt Bay, San Francisco
Bay, Monterey Bay, and Lake Tahoe
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
establishing special local regulations for
the loading, transport, and launching of
fireworks used during twenty two
separate Fourth of July fireworks
displays to be held in various locations
in Northern California and Western
Nevada. These special local regulations
are intended to prohibit vessels and
people from entering into or remaining
within the regulated areas to ensure the
safety of participants, spectators, and
mariners transiting the event areas.
DATES: This rule is effective from 10
a.m. on July 2, 2005, to 11 p.m. on July
4, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket are part of the docket CGD 11–
05–010 and are available for inspection
or copying at Coast Guard Marine Safety
Office San Francisco Bay, Coast Guard
Island, Alameda, California, 94501,
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lieutenant Doug Ebbers, U.S. Coast
Guard Marine Safety Office San
Francisco Bay, at (510) 437–2770.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
We did not publish a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the
Coast Guard finds that good cause exists
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:59 Jun 30, 2005
Jkt 205001
for not publishing an NPRM. Logistical
details surrounding the events were not
finalized and presented to the Coast
Guard in time to draft and publish an
NPRM. As such, the events would occur
before the rulemaking process was
complete. Because of the dangers posed
by the pyrotechnics used in the
fireworks displays, special local
regulations are necessary to provide for
the safety of event participants,
spectator craft, and other vessels
transiting the event areas. For the safety
concerns noted, it is in the public’s
interest to have these regulations in
effect during the events.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for
making this rule effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal
Register. Any delay in the effective date
of this rule would expose mariners to
the dangers posed by the pyrotechnics
used in the fireworks displays.
Background and Purpose
Various public and private agencies
are sponsoring short fireworks displays
between July 3, 2005, and July 5, 2005,
throughout the Captain of the Port, San
Francisco Bay Zone. The fireworks
displays are meant for entertainment
purposes in celebration of the Fourth of
July Holiday. These special local
regulations are being issued to establish
temporary regulated areas around
fireworks launch barges during the
loading of pyrotechnics, during the
transit of the barges to the display
locations, and during the fireworks
displays. For those displays launching
fireworks from shore, temporary
regulated areas are being established in
the waters surrounding the shore-based
launch locations. These regulated areas
around the fireworks launch barges and
launch locations are necessary to protect
participants, spectators, and mariners
transiting the event areas from the
hazards associated with the
pyrotechnics being used. The Coast
Guard has granted marine event permits
for each of the fireworks displays listed
in this regulation.
Discussion of Rule
The Coast Guard is establishing
temporary special local regulations on
specified waters of the Captain of the
Port, San Francisco Bay Zone. For each
of the fireworks displays involving
barges, the special local regulations
apply to the navigable waters around
and under the fireworks barge(s) within
a radius of 100 feet during the loading
of pyrotechnics onto the barge(s), the
towing of the barge(s) to the display
location, and until the start of the
fireworks display. During the fireworks
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
display, the area to which these special
local regulations apply will increase in
size to encompass the navigable waters
around and under the fireworks barge(s)
within a radius of 1,000 feet. For shorefired fireworks displays, the special
local regulations apply to the navigable
waters surrounding the launch location
within a radius of 1,000 feet during the
fireworks display.
For barge-fired displays, the effect of
the temporary special local regulations
will be to restrict general navigation in
the vicinity of fireworks barges during
the loading of pyrotechnics, during the
transit of the fireworks barges, and until
the conclusion of the scheduled display.
For shore-fired displays, the effect of the
temporary special local regulations will
be to restrict general navigation in the
vicinity of the launch location during
the fireworks display. Except for
persons or vessels authorized by the
Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no
persons or vessels may enter or remain
in the regulated areas. These regulations
are needed to keep spectators and
vessels a safe distance away to ensure
the safety of participants, spectators,
and transiting vessels.
Pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 1236, persons
violating these special local regulations
may be liable as follows: Suspension or
revocation of the license of a licensed
officer for incompetence or misconduct;
civil penalty of $6,500 for any person in
charge of the navigation of a vessel other
than a licensed officer; civil penalty of
$6,500 for the owner of a vessel
(including any corporate officer of a
corporation owning the vessel) who is
actually on board; and $2,750 for any
other person.
Regulatory Evaluation
This rule is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs
and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that
Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that
Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS).
Although these regulations prevent
traffic from transiting portions of the
San Francisco Bay zone, the effect of
these regulations will not be significant
due to the small size and limited
duration of the regulated areas. The
entities most likely affected are pleasure
craft engaged in recreational activities
and sightseeing.
E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM
01JYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 126 (Friday, July 1, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38009-38010]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-12999]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Security Service
32 CFR Part 321
[DSS Regulation 01-13-R]
Privacy Act; Implementation
AGENCY: Defense Security Service, DoD.
ACTION: Final Rule/Transfer.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Defense Security Service (DSS) is adding an exemption rule
for the system of records V5-05, entitled `Joint Personnel Adjudication
System (JPAS)'. The system of records is being transferred from the
Department of the Air Force's inventory (F031 DoD A, entitled `Joint
Personnel Adjudication System (JPAS)') to the DSS inventory of records.
The exemption rule (32 CFR part 806b) for the Air Force system is being
transferred and published as an exemption rule (32 CFR part 321.13) for
the DSS system.
The rule was published as a final rule on May 9, 2003 at 68 FR
24881.
DATES: Effective July 1, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Defense Security Service, Chief Information Officer/Chief
Operating Officer, 1340 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314-1651.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Leslie R. Blake at (703) 325-9450.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review''
It has been determined that Privacy Act rules for the Department of
Defense are not significant rules. The rules do 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 this Executive order.
Public Law 96-354, ``Regulatory Flexibility Act'' (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6)
It has been certified that Privacy Act rules for the Department of
Defense do not have significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities because they are concerned only with the
administration of Privacy Act systems of records within the Department
of Defense.
Public Law 96-511, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been certified that Privacy Act rules for the Department of
Defense impose no information requirements beyond the Department of
Defense and that the information collected within the Department of
Defense is necessary and consistent with 5 U.S.C. 552a, known as the
Privacy Act of 1974.
Section 202, Public Law 104-4, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act''
It has been certified that the Privacy Act rulemaking for the
Department of Defense 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 such rulemaking will not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments.
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism''
It has been certified that the Privacy Act rules for the Department
of Defense do not have federalism implications. The rules do 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.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 321
Privacy.
0
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 321 is to be amended to read as follows:
PART 321--DEFENSE SECURITY SERVICE PRIVACY PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 321 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Pub. L. 93-579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a).
0
2. Section 321.13 is amended by adding paragraph (h) to read as
follows:
Sec. 321.13 Exemptions.
* * * * *
(h) System identifier: V5-05.
(1) System name: Joint Personnel Adjudication System (JPAS).
(2) Exemption: (i) 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 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 of records 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), and (e)(1).
(3) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5).
(4) Reasons: (i) From subsections (c)(3) and (d) 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 source's identity not only will result in the Department
breaching the promise of confidentiality made to the source but it will
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 can 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 subsection (e)(1) because in the collection of
information for investigatory purpose, it is not always possible to
determine the relevance and necessity of particular information in the
early stages of the investigation. It is only after the information is
evaluated
[[Page 38010]]
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 23, 2005.
Jeannette Owings-Ballard,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 05-12999 Filed 6-30-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
