Inspector General; Privacy Act; Implementation, 64631-64632 [E6-18588]
Download as PDF
64631
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 71, No. 213
Friday, November 3, 2006
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.
‘‘Funds not distributed will be
allocated pro rata to the remaining
States who applied during the specified
grant application period to be solely
expended on projects previously
approved in their State plan.’’
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
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.
Dated: October 31, 2006.
Lloyd C. Day,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. E6–18563 Filed 11–2–06; 8:45 am]
RIN 0790–AI01
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
ACTION:
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 1290
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
[Docket No. FV06–1290–1 FR–C]
Office of the Secretary
RIN 0581–AC59
32 CFR Part 58
Specialty Crop Block Grant Program
AGENCY:
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION:
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES
SUMMARY: This document contains
corrections to the preamble of the final
rule (Docket No. FV–06–1290–1 FR),
published Monday, September 11, 2006
(71 FR 53303). These corrections clarify
a response to comments concerning how
the funds will be transferred to the
States and the allocation of grant funds
not distributed to a State.
DATES: Effective Date: November 3,
2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Trista Etzig, Fruit and Vegetable
Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400
Independence Avenue, SW., Stop 0243,
Washington, DC 20250–0243;
Telephone: (202) 690–4942; Fax: (202)
690–0102; or E-mail:
trista.etzig@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Corrections
In the final rule published on
September 11, 2006, beginning on page
53304, in the first column, change the
sentence beginning with ‘‘The AMS will
provide the entire’’ to the following:
‘‘Each time AMS distributes funds to
approved applicants it will be by an
electronic transfer for the entire
approved amount.’’
In the final rule published on
September 11, 2006, beginning on page
53305, in the third column, add after the
sentence ending with ‘‘requested for
that application year’’ in the first
complete paragraph, the following:
13:29 Nov 02, 2006
Jkt 211001
Department of Defense.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
Final rule; correction.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV–
1)
ACTION:
SUMMARY: This document removes part
58, ‘‘Human Immunodeficiency Virus
(HIV–1)’’ presently in Title 32 of the
Code of Federal Regulations. This part
has served the purpose for which it was
intended in the CFR and is no longer
necessary.
DATES:
Effective Date: November 3,
2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
L.
Pahland, 703–681–1703, extension
5213.
This part
58 is removed to as a part of a DoD
exercise to remove CFR parts no longer
required to be codified. The
corresponding DoD Instruction 6485.01
is available at https://www.dtic.mil/whs/
directives/corres/html/648501.htm.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 58
Foreign relations, Government
employees, HIV/AIDS, Military
personnel.
PART 58—[REMOVED]
32 CFR Part 312
[Docket No. DOD–2006–OS–0168]
Inspector General; Privacy Act;
Implementation
Inspector General, DoD.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Office of the Inspector
General (OIG) is exempting those
records in a new system of records
(CIG–23, ‘‘Public Affairs Files,’’ (August
7, 2006, 71 FR 44667)) in its inventory
of systems of records pursuant to the
Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as
amended.
DATES: Effective Date: December 4, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Darryl R. Aaron at (703) 604–9785.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
proposed rule was published on August
7, 2006, at 71 FR 44602. No comments
were received. The rule is therefore
adopted as published below.
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.
I
Accordingly, by the authority of 10
U.S.C. 301, 32 CFR part 58 is removed.
Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory
Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6)
Dated: October 30, 2006.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 06–9044 Filed 10–2–06; 8:45 am]
It has been determined 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
BILLING CODE 5001–06–M
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\03NOR1.SGM
03NOR1
64632
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 213 / Friday, November 3, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
systems of records within the
Department of Defense.
Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork
Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been determined 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 determined that 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 determined that 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 312
Privacy.
I Accordingly, 32 CFR part 312 is
amended as follows:
for the original primary systems of
records which they are a part.
(3) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2),
(k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(3), (k)(4), (k)(5), (k)(6),
and (k)(7).
(4) Reasons: Records are only exempt
from pertinent provisions of 5 U.S.C.
552a to the extent (1) such provisions
have been identified and an exemption
claimed for the original record and (2)
the purposes underlying the exemption
for the original record still pertain to the
record which is now contained in this
system of records. In general, the
exemptions were claimed in order to
protect properly classified information
relating to national defense and foreign
policy, to avoid interference during the
conduct of criminal, civil, or
administrative actions or investigations,
to ensure protective services provided
the President and others are not
compromised, to protect the identity of
confidential sources incident to Federal
employment, military service, contract,
and security clearance determinations,
to preserve the confidentiality and
integrity of Federal testing materials,
and to safeguard evaluation materials
used for military promotions when
furnished by a confidential source. The
exemption rule for the original records
will identify the specific reasons why
the records are exempt from specific
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Dated: October 30, 2006.
C.R. Choate,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. E6–18588 Filed 11–2–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
PART 312—OIG PRIVACY ACT
PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
I
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR
part 312 continues to read as follows:
32 CFR Part 318
Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5
U.S.C. 552a).
[Docket No. DOD–2006–OS–0169]
2. § 312.12, is amended by adding
paragraph (j) to read as follows:
RIN 0790–AI03
I
§ 312.12
*
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES
Defense Threat Reduction Agency;
Privacy Act; Implementation
Exemptions.
*
*
*
*
(j) System identifier: CIG 23
(1) System name: Public Affairs Files.
(2) Exemption: During the course of
processing a General Counsel action,
exempt materials from other systems of
records may in turn become part of the
case records in this system. To the
extent that copies of exempt records
from those ‘other’ systems of records are
entered into the Public Affairs Files, the
Office of the Inspector General hereby
claims the same exemptions for the
records from those ‘other’ systems that
are entered into this system, as claimed
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:41 Nov 02, 2006
Jkt 211001
Defense Threat Reduction
Agency, DoD.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
Ms.
Brenda M. Carter at (703) 325–1205 or
DSN 221–1205.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
proposed rule was published on August
7, 2006, at 71 FR 44603. One public
comment was received, but the
comments did not impact the proposed
rule. The rule is therefore adopted as
published below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
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 determined 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 determined 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’’
SUMMARY: The Defense Threat Reduction
It has been determined that Privacy
Agency is exempting those records in a
Act rulemaking for the Department of
new system of records (HDTRA 021,
Defense does not involve a Federal
‘‘Freedom of Information Act and
mandate that may result in the
Privacy Act Case Files’’ (August 7, 2006, expenditure by State, local and tribal
71 FR 44668)) in its inventory of
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
systems of records pursuant to the
private sector, of $100 million or more
Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as
and that such rulemaking will not
amended.
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 4, 2006.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\03NOR1.SGM
03NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 213 (Friday, November 3, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64631-64632]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-18588]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
32 CFR Part 312
[Docket No. DOD-2006-OS-0168]
RIN 0790-AI01
Inspector General; Privacy Act; Implementation
AGENCY: Inspector General, DoD.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) is exempting those
records in a new system of records (CIG-23, ``Public Affairs Files,''
(August 7, 2006, 71 FR 44667)) in its inventory of systems of records
pursuant to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended.
DATES: Effective Date: December 4, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Darryl R. Aaron at (703) 604-9785.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed rule was published on August 7,
2006, at 71 FR 44602. No comments were received. The rule is therefore
adopted as published below.
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 determined 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
[[Page 64632]]
systems of records within the Department of Defense.
Public Law 96-511, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been determined 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 determined that 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 determined that 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 312
Privacy.
0
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 312 is amended as follows:
PART 312--OIG PRIVACY ACT PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 312 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Pub. L. 93-579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a).
0
2. Sec. 312.12, is amended by adding paragraph (j) to read as follows:
Sec. 312.12 Exemptions.
* * * * *
(j) System identifier: CIG 23
(1) System name: Public Affairs Files.
(2) Exemption: During the course of processing a General Counsel
action, exempt materials from other systems of records may in turn
become part of the case records in this system. To the extent that
copies of exempt records from those `other' systems of records are
entered into the Public Affairs Files, the Office of the Inspector
General hereby claims the same exemptions for the records from those
`other' systems that are entered into this system, as claimed for the
original primary systems of records which they are a part.
(3) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(3), (k)(4),
(k)(5), (k)(6), and (k)(7).
(4) Reasons: Records are only exempt from pertinent provisions of 5
U.S.C. 552a to the extent (1) such provisions have been identified and
an exemption claimed for the original record and (2) the purposes
underlying the exemption for the original record still pertain to the
record which is now contained in this system of records. In general,
the exemptions were claimed in order to protect properly classified
information relating to national defense and foreign policy, to avoid
interference during the conduct of criminal, civil, or administrative
actions or investigations, to ensure protective services provided the
President and others are not compromised, to protect the identity of
confidential sources incident to Federal employment, military service,
contract, and security clearance determinations, to preserve the
confidentiality and integrity of Federal testing materials, and to
safeguard evaluation materials used for military promotions when
furnished by a confidential source. The exemption rule for the original
records will identify the specific reasons why the records are exempt
from specific provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Dated: October 30, 2006.
C.R. Choate,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. E6-18588 Filed 11-2-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P