Privacy Act; Implementation, 28767-28768 [E8-11140]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 97 / Monday, May 19, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Special Analyses
It has been determined that this notice
of proposed rulemaking is not a
significant regulatory action as defined
in Executive Order 12866. Therefore, a
regulatory assessment is not required. It
has also been determined that section
553(b) of the Administrative Procedure
Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply
to these regulations, and because the
regulation does not impose a collection
of information on small entities, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
chapter 6) does not apply. Pursuant to
section 7805(f) of the Code, this notice
of proposed rulemaking has been
submitted to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration for comment on its
impact on small business.
Comments and Public Hearing
Before the proposed regulations are
adopted as final regulations,
consideration will be given to any
written (a signed original and eight (8)
copies) or electronic comments that are
submitted timely to the IRS. The IRS
and Treasury Department request
comments on the clarity of the proposed
rules and how they can be made easier
to understand. All comments will be
available for public inspection and
copying. A public hearing will be
scheduled if requested in writing by any
person that timely submits written
comments. If a public hearing is
scheduled, notice of the date, time, and
place for the public hearing will be
published in the Federal Register.
Drafting Information
The principal authors of these
proposed regulations are Laura Fields
and Steven A. Schmoll, Office of the
Associate Chief Counsel (Passthroughs
and Special Industries), IRS. However,
other personnel from the IRS and
Treasury Department participated in
their development.
List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1
Income taxes, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Proposed Amendments to the
Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
PART 1—INCOME TAXES
Paragraph 1. The authority citation
for part 1 continues to read, in part, as
follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *
Par. 2. Section 1.704–3 is amended
by:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:51 May 16, 2008
Jkt 214001
1. Adding five sentences to paragraph
(a)(1) at the end of the last sentence and
revising paragraph (a)(10) to read as
follows.
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
§ 1.704–3
Contributed property.
(a) * * * (1) * * * The principles of
this paragraph (a)(1), together with the
methods described in paragraphs (b), (c)
and (d) of this section, apply only to
contributions of property that are
otherwise respected. See § 1.701–2.
Accordingly, even though a
partnership’s allocation method may be
described in the literal language of
paragraphs (b), (c) or (d) of this section,
based on the particular facts and
circumstances, the Commissioner can
recast the contribution as appropriate to
avoid tax results inconsistent with the
intent of subchapter K. One factor that
may be considered by the Commissioner
is the use of the remedial allocation
method by related partners in which
allocations of remedial items of income,
gain, loss or deduction are made to one
partner and the allocations of offsetting
remedial items are made to a related
partner. The preceding four sentences
are effective for taxable years beginning
after the date of publication of the
Treasury decision adopting these rules
as final regulation in the Federal
Register.
*
*
*
*
*
(10) Anti-abuse rule—(i) In general.
An allocation method (or combination
of methods) is not reasonable if the
contribution of property (or event that
results in reverse section 704(c)
allocations) and the corresponding
allocation of tax items with respect to
the property are made with a view to
shifting the tax consequences of built-in
gain or loss among the partners in a
manner that substantially reduces the
present value of the partners’ aggregate
tax liability. For purposes of this
paragraph (a)(10), the tax effect of an
allocation method (or combination of
methods) on direct and indirect partners
is considered.
(ii) Definition of indirect partner. An
indirect partner is any direct or indirect
owner of a partnership, S corporation,
or controlled foreign corporation (as
defined in section 957(a) or 953(c)), or
direct or indirect beneficiary of a trust
or estate, that is a partner in the
partnership, and any consolidated group
of which the partner in the partnership
is a member (within the meaning of
§ 1.1502–1(h)). An owner (whether
directly or through tiers of entities) of a
controlled foreign corporation is treated
as an indirect partner only with respect
to allocations of items of income, gain,
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
28767
loss, or deduction that enter into the
computation of a United States
shareholder’s inclusion under section
951(a) with respect to the controlled
foreign corporation, enter into any
person’s income attributable to a United
States shareholder’s inclusion under
section 951(a) with respect to the
controlled foreign corporation, or would
enter into the computations described in
this sentence if such items were
allocated to the controlled foreign
corporation.
(iii) Effective/applicability date. The
last sentence of paragraph (a)(10)(i), and
paragraph (a)(10)(ii) of this section are
effective for taxable years beginning
after the date of publication of the
Treasury decision adopting these rules
as final regulations in the Federal
Register.
*
*
*
*
*
Linda E. Stiff,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E8–11174 Filed 5–16–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
[Docket ID: DoD–2008–OS–0053]
32 CFR Part 322
Privacy Act; Implementation
National Security Agency/
Central Security Services, DoD.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The National Security
Agency/Central Security Services (NSA/
CSS) is proposing to add an exemption
rule for the system of records GNSA 23,
‘‘NSA/CSS Operations Security Support
Program and Training Files’’ when an
exemption has been previously claimed
for the records in another Privacy Act
system of records. The exemption is
intended to preserve the exempt status
of the record when the purposes
underlying the exemption for the
original records are still valid and
necessary to protect the contents of the
records.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 18, 2008 to be considered
by this agency.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number and/or RIN
number and title, by any of the
following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
E:\FR\FM\19MYP1.SGM
19MYP1
28768
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 97 / Monday, May 19, 2008 / Proposed Rules
• Mail: Federal Docket Management
System Office, 1160 Defense Pentagon,
Washington, DC 20301–1160.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or Regulatory
Information Number (RIN) 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
https://www.regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms.
Anne Hill at (301) 688–6527.
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 determined that this
Privacy Act rule for the Department of
Defense 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.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS
Public Law 95–511, ‘‘Paperwork
Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been determined that this
Privacy Act rule for the Department of
Defense imposes 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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:51 May 16, 2008
Jkt 214001
Section 202, Public Law 104–4,
‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’
It has been determined that this
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 the
Privacy Act rules for the Department of
Defense do not have federalism
implications. The 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.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 322
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 322 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR
part 322 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat. 1896
(5 U.S.C. 552a).
2. Section 322.7 is amended by
adding paragraph (r) to read as follows:
§ 322.7
Exempt systems of records.
*
*
*
*
*
(r) GNSA 23.
(1) System name: NSA/CSS
Operations Security Support and
Program Files.
(2) Exemption. All portions of this
system of records which fall within the
scope of 5 U.S.C. 552a (k)(4) may be
exempt from the provisions of 5 U.S.C.
552a(c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H),
(e)(4)(I) and (f).
(3) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(4).
(4) Reasons: (i) From subsection (c)(3)
because the release of the disclosure
accounting would place the subject of
an investigation on notice that they are
under investigation and provide them
with significant information concerning
the nature of the investigation, thus
resulting in a serious impediment to law
enforcement investigations.
(ii) From subsections (d) and (f)
because providing access to records of a
civil or administrative investigation and
the right to contest the contents of those
records and force changes to be made to
the information contained therein
would seriously interfere with and
thwart the orderly and unbiased
conduct of the investigation and impede
case preparation. Providing access rights
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
normally afforded under the Privacy Act
would provide the subject with valuable
information that would allow
interference with or compromise of
witnesses or render witnesses reluctant
to cooperate; lead to suppression,
alteration, or destruction of evidence;
enable individuals to conceal their
wrongdoing or mislead the course of the
investigation; and result in the secreting
of or other disposition of assets that
would make them difficult or
impossible to reach in order to satisfy
any Government claim growing out of
the investigation or proceeding.
(iii) From subsection (e)(1) because it
is not always possible to detect the
relevance or necessity of each piece of
information in the early stages of an
investigation. In some cases, it is only
after the information is evaluated in
light of other evidence that its relevance
and necessity will be clear.
(iv) From subsections (e)(4)(G) and (H)
because this system of records is
compiled for investigative purposes and
is exempt from the access provisions of
subsections (d) and (f).
(v) From subsection (e)(4)(I) because
to the extent that this provision is
construed to require more detailed
disclosure than the broad, generic
information currently published in the
system notice, an exemption from this
provision is necessary to protect the
confidentiality of sources of information
and to protect privacy and physical
safety of witnesses and informants.
Dated: May 5, 2008.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer,
Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. E8–11140 Filed 5–16–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[EPA–R06–RCRA–2008–0418; SW–FRL–
8566–6]
Hazardous Waste Management
System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste; Proposed Exclusion
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule and request for
comment.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to use
the Delisting Risk Assessment Software
(DRAS) Version 3.0 in the evaluation of
a delisting petition. Based on waste
specific information provided by the
petitioner, EPA is proposing to use the
E:\FR\FM\19MYP1.SGM
19MYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 97 (Monday, May 19, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28767-28768]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-11140]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
[Docket ID: DoD-2008-OS-0053]
32 CFR Part 322
Privacy Act; Implementation
AGENCY: National Security Agency/Central Security Services, DoD.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Security Agency/Central Security Services (NSA/
CSS) is proposing to add an exemption rule for the system of records
GNSA 23, ``NSA/CSS Operations Security Support Program and Training
Files'' when an exemption has been previously claimed for the records
in another Privacy Act system of records. The exemption is intended to
preserve the exempt status of the record when the purposes underlying
the exemption for the original records are still valid and necessary to
protect the contents of the records.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 18, 2008 to be
considered by this agency.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and/or
RIN number and title, by any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
[[Page 28768]]
Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 1160
Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-1160.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) 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 https://
www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Anne Hill at (301) 688-6527.
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 determined that this Privacy Act rule for the
Department of Defense 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.
Public Law 95-511, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule for the
Department of Defense imposes 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 this 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 the Privacy Act rules for the
Department of Defense do not have federalism implications. The 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.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 322
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 322 is proposed to be amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 322 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Pub. L. 93-579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a).
2. Section 322.7 is amended by adding paragraph (r) to read as
follows:
Sec. 322.7 Exempt systems of records.
* * * * *
(r) GNSA 23.
(1) System name: NSA/CSS Operations Security Support and Program
Files.
(2) Exemption. All portions of this system of records which fall
within the scope of 5 U.S.C. 552a (k)(4) may be exempt from the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H),
(e)(4)(I) and (f).
(3) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(4).
(4) Reasons: (i) From subsection (c)(3) because the release of the
disclosure accounting would place the subject of an investigation on
notice that they are under investigation and provide them with
significant information concerning the nature of the investigation,
thus resulting in a serious impediment to law enforcement
investigations.
(ii) From subsections (d) and (f) because providing access to
records of a civil or administrative investigation and the right to
contest the contents of those records and force changes to be made to
the information contained therein would seriously interfere with and
thwart the orderly and unbiased conduct of the investigation and impede
case preparation. Providing access rights normally afforded under the
Privacy Act would provide the subject with valuable information that
would allow interference with or compromise of witnesses or render
witnesses reluctant to cooperate; lead to suppression, alteration, or
destruction of evidence; enable individuals to conceal their wrongdoing
or mislead the course of the investigation; and result in the secreting
of or other disposition of assets that would make them difficult or
impossible to reach in order to satisfy any Government claim growing
out of the investigation or proceeding.
(iii) From subsection (e)(1) because it is not always possible to
detect the relevance or necessity of each piece of information in the
early stages of an investigation. In some cases, it is only after the
information is evaluated in light of other evidence that its relevance
and necessity will be clear.
(iv) From subsections (e)(4)(G) and (H) because this system of
records is compiled for investigative purposes and is exempt from the
access provisions of subsections (d) and (f).
(v) From subsection (e)(4)(I) because to the extent that this
provision is construed to require more detailed disclosure than the
broad, generic information currently published in the system notice, an
exemption from this provision is necessary to protect the
confidentiality of sources of information and to protect privacy and
physical safety of witnesses and informants.
Dated: May 5, 2008.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. E8-11140 Filed 5-16-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
