Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of Exemptions, 5421-5422 [E8-1553]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
5421
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 73, No. 20
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
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.
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.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
6 CFR Part 5
[Docket No. DHS–2008–0004]
Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of
Exemptions
Department of Homeland
Security.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Department of Homeland
Security is issuing a final rule
exempting from certain provisions of
the Privacy Act a revised and updated
Privacy Act system of records
maintained by the Office of
Investigations in the Office of the
Inspector General. The system of
records is the ‘‘Investigative Data
Management System.’’
DATES: Effective Dates: This final rule is
effective January 30, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard N. Reback, Department of
Homeland Security, Office of Inspector
General/STOP 2600, 245 Murray Drive,
SW., Building 410, Washington, DC
20528, by telephone (202) 254–4100 or
facsimile (202) 254–4285; or Hugo
Teufel III, (703) 235–0780, Chief Privacy
Officer, U.S. Department of Homeland
Security, Washington, DC 20528; e-mail
privacy@dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
Background
On November 9, 2005, the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) published
a notice of proposed rulemaking (70 FR
67931), to exempt a Privacy Act system
of records maintained by the Office of
Investigations in the Office of the
Inspector General (OIG) from certain
provisions of the Privacy Act. The
system of records is the DHS OIG
Investigations Data Management
System.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:37 Jan 29, 2008
Jkt 214001
No comments were received on the
proposed rulemaking. Accordingly, the
Department is adopting the proposed
rule as final.
Pursuant to the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–
612, DHS certifies that these regulations
will not significantly affect a substantial
number of small entities. The final rule
imposes no duties or obligations on
small entities. Further, in accordance
with the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501,
DHS has determined that this final rule
would not impose new record keeping,
application, reporting, or other types of
information collection requirements.
List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5
Freedom of information, Privacy.
I For the reasons stated in the preamble,
DHS amends Chapter I of Title 6, Code
of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 5—DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS
AND INFORMATION
1. The authority citation for part 5
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: Pub. L. 107–296, 116 Stat. 2135,
6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; 5 U.S.C. 301. Subpart A
also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552. Subpart B
also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a.
2. At the end of Appendix C to part
5, add the following new paragraph 5 to
read as follows:
I
Appendix C to Part 5—DHS Systems of
Records Exempt From the Privacy Act
*
*
*
*
*
5. DHS–OIG–2005–002, the Office of
Inspector General Investigative Records
System includes both paper investigative
files and the ‘‘Investigation Data Management
System’’ (IDMS)—an electronic case
management and tracking information
system, which also generates reports. The
Investigative Records System consists of
records and information collected and
maintained to receive and process allegations
of violations of criminal, civil, and
administrative laws and regulations relating
to DHS programs, operations, and employees,
as well as contractors and other individuals
and entities associated with the DHS. The
system allows the DHS Office of Inspector
General to monitor case assignments,
disposition, status, and results; manage
investigations and information provided
during the course of such investigations;
track actions taken by management regarding
misconduct; track legal actions taken
following referrals to the United States
Department of Justice for prosecution or
litigation; provide information relating to any
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
adverse action or other proceeding that may
occur as a result of the findings of an
investigation; retrieve investigation results;
provide a system for creating and reporting
statistical information; and to provide a
system to track Office of Inspector General
investigators’ firearms qualification records
and property records. Pursuant to
exemptions 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2) of the Privacy
Act, portions of this system are exempt from
5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (4); (d); (e)(1), (e)(2),
(e)(3), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(5) and (e)(8); (f);
and (g). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a (k)(1),
(k)(2) and (k)(5), this system is exempt from
the following provisions of the Privacy Act,
subject to the limitations set forth in those
subsections: 5 U.S.C. 552a (c)(3), (d), (e)(1),
(e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), and (f). Exemptions from
these particular subsections are justified, on
a case-by-case basis to be determined at the
time a request is made, for the following
reasons:
(a) From subsection (c)(3) and (c)(4)
(Accounting for Disclosures) because release
of the accounting of disclosures could alert
the subject of an investigation of an actual or
potential criminal, civil, or regulatory
violation, to the existence of the
investigation; and reveal investigative
interest on the part of DHS as well as the
recipient agency. Disclosure of the
accounting would therefore present a serious
impediment to law enforcement efforts and/
or efforts to preserve national security.
Disclosure of the accounting would also
permit the individual who is the subject of
a record to impede the investigation, tamper
with witnesses or evidence, and avoid
detection or apprehension, which would
undermine the entire investigative process.
(b) From subsection (d) (Access to Records)
because access to the records contained in
this system of records could inform the
subject of an investigation of an actual or
potential criminal, civil, or regulatory
violation, to the existence of the
investigation, and reveal investigative
interest on the part of DHS or another agency.
Access to the records could permit the
individual who is the subject of a record to
impede the investigation, tamper with
witnesses or evidence, and avoid detection or
apprehension. Amendment of the records
could interfere with ongoing investigations
and law enforcement activities and would
impose an impossible administrative burden
by requiring investigations to be
continuously reinvestigated. In addition,
permitting access and amendment to such
information could disclose security-sensitive
information that could be detrimental to
homeland security.
(c) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and
Necessity of Information) because in the
course of investigations into potential
violations of federal law, the accuracy of
information obtained or introduced
occasionally may be unclear or the
information may not be strictly relevant or
E:\FR\FM\30JAR1.SGM
30JAR1
5422
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 20 / Wednesday, January 30, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
necessary to a specific investigation. In the
interests of effective law enforcement, it is
appropriate to retain all information that may
aid in establishing patterns of unlawful
activity.
(d) From subsection (e)(2) (Collection of
Information from Individuals) because
requiring that information be collected from
the subject of an investigation would alert the
subject as to the nature or existence of an
investigation, thereby interfering with the
related investigation and law enforcement
activities.
(e) From subsection (e)(3) (Notice to
Subjects) because providing such detailed
information would impede law enforcement
in that it could compromise the existence of
a confidential investigation or reveal the
identity of witnesses or confidential
informants.
(f) From subsections (e)(4)(G) and (H)
(Agency Requirements), (f) (Agency Rules),
and (g) (Civil Remedies) because portions of
this system are exempt from the individual
access provisions of subsection (d).
(g) From subsection (e)(5) (Collection of
Information) because in the collection of
information for law enforcement purposes it
is impossible to determine in advance what
information is accurate, relevant, timely, and
complete. Compliance with (e)(5) would
preclude OIG special agents from using their
investigative training and exercise of good
judgment to both conduct and report on
investigations.
(h) From subsection (e)(8)(Notice on
Individuals) because compliance would
interfere with OIG’s ability to obtain, serve,
and issue subpoenas, warrants and other law
enforcement mechanisms that may be filed
under seal, and could result in disclosure of
investigative techniques, procedures, and
evidence.
Hugo Teufel III,
Chief Privacy Officer, Department of
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. E8–1553 Filed 1–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–10–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 948
[Docket No. AMS–FV–07–0115; FV08–948–
1 FR]
Irish Potatoes Grown in Colorado;
Modification of the Handling
Regulation for Area No. 2
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This rule modifies the
minimum size requirements under the
Colorado potato marketing order, Area
No. 2. The marketing order regulates the
handling of Irish potatoes grown in
Colorado, and is administered locally by
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:37 Jan 29, 2008
Jkt 214001
the Colorado Potato Administrative
Committee, Area No. 2 (Committee).
The minimum size requirements for
Area No. 2 potatoes specify that
potatoes handled under the marketing
order must be at least 2 inches in
diameter or 4 ounces in weight, with
exceptions allowing the handling of
round potatoes of any weight, and
Russet Burbank, Russet Norkotah, and
Silverton Russet potato varieties with a
minimum of 17⁄8 inches in diameter or
4 ounces in weight. This rule removes
the exception that Russet Burbank,
Russet Norkotah, and Silverton Russet
potato varieties may be 17⁄8 inches in
diameter, thus requiring these varieties
to also meet the minimum requirements
of 2 inches in diameter or 4 ounces in
weight. This change is intended to
facilitate the handling and marketing of
Colorado Area No. 2 potatoes.
DATES: Effective Date: January 31, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Teresa Hutchinson or Gary Olson,
Northwest Marketing Field Office,
Marketing Order Administration
Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,
AMS, USDA, Telephone: (503) 326–
2724, Fax: (503) 326–7440, or e-mail:
Teresa.Hutchinson@usda.gov or
GaryD.Olson@usda.gov.
Small businesses may request
information on complying with this
regulation by contacting Jay Guerber,
Marketing Order Administration
Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,
AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence
Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington,
DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720–
2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or e-mail:
Jay.Guerber@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final
rule is issued under Marketing
Agreement No. 97 and Marketing Order
No. 948, both as amended (7 CFR part
948), regulating the handling of Irish
potatoes grown in Colorado, hereinafter
referred to as the ‘‘order.’’ The order is
effective under the Agricultural
Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as
amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter
referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’
The Department of Agriculture
(USDA) is issuing this rule in
conformance with Executive Order
12866.
This final rule has been reviewed
under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. This rule is not intended
to have retroactive effect. This rule will
not preempt any State or local laws,
regulations, or policies, unless they
present an irreconcilable conflict with
this rule.
The Act provides that administrative
proceedings must be exhausted before
parties may file suit in court. Under
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any
handler subject to an order may file
with USDA a petition stating that the
order, any provision of the order, or any
obligation imposed in connection with
the order is not in accordance with law
and request a modification of the order
or to be exempted therefrom. A handler
is afforded the opportunity for a hearing
on the petition. After the hearing USDA
would rule on the petition. The Act
provides that the district court of the
United States in any district in which
the handler is an inhabitant, or has his
or her principal place of business, has
jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on
the petition, provided an action is filed
not later than 20 days after the date of
the entry of the ruling.
This final rule modifies the minimum
size requirements under the order. The
minimum size requirements for Area
No. 2 potatoes specify that potatoes
handled under the marketing order must
be at least 2 inches in diameter or 4
ounces in weight with exceptions
allowing the handling of round potatoes
of any weight, and Russet Burbank,
Russet Norkotah, and Silverton Russet
potato varieties with a minimum of 17⁄8
inches in diameter or 4 ounces in
weight. This rule removes the exception
that Russet Burbank, Russet Norkotah,
and Silverton Russet potato varieties
may be 17⁄8 inches in diameter. This rule
was recommended by the Committee at
a meeting on August 16, 2007.
Section 948.22 authorizes the
issuance of grade, size, quality,
maturity, pack, and container
regulations for potatoes grown in the
production area. Section 948.21 further
authorizes the modification, suspension,
or termination of requirements issued
pursuant to § 948.22.
Section 948.40 provides that
whenever the handling of potatoes is
regulated pursuant to §§ 948.20 through
948.24, such potatoes must be inspected
by the Federal-State Inspection Service,
and certified as meeting the applicable
requirements of such regulations.
Under the order, the State of Colorado
is divided into three areas of regulation
for marketing order purposes. These
include: Area No. 1, commonly known
as the Western Slope, includes and
consists of the counties of Routt, Eagle,
Pitkin, Gunnison, Hinsdale, La Plata,
and all counties west thereof; Area No.
2, commonly known as the San Luis
Valley, includes and consists of the
counties of Sanguache, Huerfano, Las
Animas, Mineral, Archuleta, and all
counties south thereof; and, Area No. 3
includes and consists of all the
remaining counties in the State of
Colorado which are not included in
Area No. 1 or Area No. 2. The order
E:\FR\FM\30JAR1.SGM
30JAR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 20 (Wednesday, January 30, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5421-5422]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-1553]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
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.
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.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 20 / Wednesday, January 30, 2008 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 5421]]
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
6 CFR Part 5
[Docket No. DHS-2008-0004]
Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of Exemptions
AGENCY: Department of Homeland Security.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Security is issuing a final rule
exempting from certain provisions of the Privacy Act a revised and
updated Privacy Act system of records maintained by the Office of
Investigations in the Office of the Inspector General. The system of
records is the ``Investigative Data Management System.''
DATES: Effective Dates: This final rule is effective January 30, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard N. Reback, Department of
Homeland Security, Office of Inspector General/STOP 2600, 245 Murray
Drive, SW., Building 410, Washington, DC 20528, by telephone (202) 254-
4100 or facsimile (202) 254-4285; or Hugo Teufel III, (703) 235-0780,
Chief Privacy Officer, U.S. Department of Homeland Security,
Washington, DC 20528; e-mail privacy@dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On November 9, 2005, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
published a notice of proposed rulemaking (70 FR 67931), to exempt a
Privacy Act system of records maintained by the Office of
Investigations in the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) from
certain provisions of the Privacy Act. The system of records is the DHS
OIG Investigations Data Management System.
No comments were received on the proposed rulemaking. Accordingly,
the Department is adopting the proposed rule as final.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
U.S.C. 601-612, DHS certifies that these regulations will not
significantly affect a substantial number of small entities. The final
rule imposes no duties or obligations on small entities. Further, in
accordance with the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
44 U.S.C. 3501, DHS has determined that this final rule would not
impose new record keeping, application, reporting, or other types of
information collection requirements.
List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5
Freedom of information, Privacy.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DHS amends Chapter I of Title
6, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 5--DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS AND INFORMATION
0
1. The authority citation for part 5 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Pub. L. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135, 6 U.S.C. 101 et
seq.; 5 U.S.C. 301. Subpart A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552.
Subpart B also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a.
0
2. At the end of Appendix C to part 5, add the following new paragraph
5 to read as follows:
Appendix C to Part 5--DHS Systems of Records Exempt From the Privacy
Act
* * * * *
5. DHS-OIG-2005-002, the Office of Inspector General
Investigative Records System includes both paper investigative files
and the ``Investigation Data Management System'' (IDMS)--an
electronic case management and tracking information system, which
also generates reports. The Investigative Records System consists of
records and information collected and maintained to receive and
process allegations of violations of criminal, civil, and
administrative laws and regulations relating to DHS programs,
operations, and employees, as well as contractors and other
individuals and entities associated with the DHS. The system allows
the DHS Office of Inspector General to monitor case assignments,
disposition, status, and results; manage investigations and
information provided during the course of such investigations; track
actions taken by management regarding misconduct; track legal
actions taken following referrals to the United States Department of
Justice for prosecution or litigation; provide information relating
to any adverse action or other proceeding that may occur as a result
of the findings of an investigation; retrieve investigation results;
provide a system for creating and reporting statistical information;
and to provide a system to track Office of Inspector General
investigators' firearms qualification records and property records.
Pursuant to exemptions 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2) of the Privacy Act,
portions of this system are exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (4);
(d); (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(5) and
(e)(8); (f); and (g). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a (k)(1), (k)(2) and
(k)(5), this system is exempt from the following provisions of the
Privacy Act, subject to the limitations set forth in those
subsections: 5 U.S.C. 552a (c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G),
(e)(4)(H), and (f). Exemptions from these particular subsections are
justified, on a case-by-case basis to be determined at the time a
request is made, for the following reasons:
(a) From subsection (c)(3) and (c)(4) (Accounting for
Disclosures) because release of the accounting of disclosures could
alert the subject of an investigation of an actual or potential
criminal, civil, or regulatory violation, to the existence of the
investigation; and reveal investigative interest on the part of DHS
as well as the recipient agency. Disclosure of the accounting would
therefore present a serious impediment to law enforcement efforts
and/or efforts to preserve national security. Disclosure of the
accounting would also permit the individual who is the subject of a
record to impede the investigation, tamper with witnesses or
evidence, and avoid detection or apprehension, which would undermine
the entire investigative process.
(b) From subsection (d) (Access to Records) because access to
the records contained in this system of records could inform the
subject of an investigation of an actual or potential criminal,
civil, or regulatory violation, to the existence of the
investigation, and reveal investigative interest on the part of DHS
or another agency. Access to the records could permit the individual
who is the subject of a record to impede the investigation, tamper
with witnesses or evidence, and avoid detection or apprehension.
Amendment of the records could interfere with ongoing investigations
and law enforcement activities and would impose an impossible
administrative burden by requiring investigations to be continuously
reinvestigated. In addition, permitting access and amendment to such
information could disclose security-sensitive information that could
be detrimental to homeland security.
(c) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and Necessity of
Information) because in the course of investigations into potential
violations of federal law, the accuracy of information obtained or
introduced occasionally may be unclear or the information may not be
strictly relevant or
[[Page 5422]]
necessary to a specific investigation. In the interests of effective
law enforcement, it is appropriate to retain all information that
may aid in establishing patterns of unlawful activity.
(d) From subsection (e)(2) (Collection of Information from
Individuals) because requiring that information be collected from
the subject of an investigation would alert the subject as to the
nature or existence of an investigation, thereby interfering with
the related investigation and law enforcement activities.
(e) From subsection (e)(3) (Notice to Subjects) because
providing such detailed information would impede law enforcement in
that it could compromise the existence of a confidential
investigation or reveal the identity of witnesses or confidential
informants.
(f) From subsections (e)(4)(G) and (H) (Agency Requirements),
(f) (Agency Rules), and (g) (Civil Remedies) because portions of
this system are exempt from the individual access provisions of
subsection (d).
(g) From subsection (e)(5) (Collection of Information) because
in the collection of information for law enforcement purposes it is
impossible to determine in advance what information is accurate,
relevant, timely, and complete. Compliance with (e)(5) would
preclude OIG special agents from using their investigative training
and exercise of good judgment to both conduct and report on
investigations.
(h) From subsection (e)(8)(Notice on Individuals) because
compliance would interfere with OIG's ability to obtain, serve, and
issue subpoenas, warrants and other law enforcement mechanisms that
may be filed under seal, and could result in disclosure of
investigative techniques, procedures, and evidence.
Hugo Teufel III,
Chief Privacy Officer, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. E8-1553 Filed 1-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
