Privacy Act; Implementation, 55784-55785 [E9-26032]
Download as PDF
55784
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 208 / Thursday, October 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 326
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’’
It has been determined that Privacy
Act rules for the Department of Defense
do 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.
dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
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.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:45 Oct 28, 2009
Jkt 220001
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 326 is
amended as follows:
PART 326—PRIVACY ACT PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR
part 326 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Public Law 93–579, 88 Stat.
1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a).
2. Section 326.17 is amended by
adding paragraph (k) to read as follows:
■
§ 326.17
Exemptions.
*
*
*
*
*
k. QNRO–27.
1. System name: Legal Records.
2. Exemption: Any portion of this
system of records which falls within the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) and
(k)(5) may be exempt from the following
subsections of 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), (d),
(e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I), and (f).
3. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a (k)(2) and
(k)(5).
4. Reasons: i. From subsection (c)(3)
because to grant access to the
accounting for each disclosure as
required by the Privacy Act, including
the date, nature, and purpose of each
disclosure and the identity of the
recipient, could alert the subject to the
existence of the investigation. This
could seriously compromise case
preparation by prematurely revealing its
existence and nature; compromise or
interfere with witnesses or make
witnesses reluctant to cooperate; and
lead to suppression, alteration, or
destruction of evidence.
ii. From subsections (d) and (f)
because providing access to
investigative records 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
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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: October 7, 2009.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer,
Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. E9–26050 Filed 10–28–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Air Force
[Docket ID: USAF–2009–0009]
32 CFR Part 806b
Privacy Act; Implementation
Department of Air Force, DoD.
Final rule with request for
comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Department of Air Force
is updating the Department of Air Force
Privacy Act Program Rules, 32 CFR part
806b, by adding the (k)(2) exemption to
accurately describe the basis for
exempting the records. The Privacy Act
system of records notice, F051 AFJA E,
entitled ‘‘Judge Advocate General’s
Professional Conduct Files’’, has already
been published on December 31, 2008
(73 FR 80372).
DATES: The rule will be effective on
December 28, 2009 unless comments are
received that would result in a contrary
determination. Comments will be
accepted on or before December 28,
2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number and title,
by any of the following methods.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
E:\FR\FM\29OCR1.SGM
29OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 208 / Thursday, October 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
• Mail: Federal Docket management
System Office, 1160 Defense Pentagon,
Washington, DC 20301–1160.
Intructions: 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: Mr.
Kenneth Brodie at (703) 696–7557.
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 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.
dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
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 rules for the Department of Defense
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:45 Oct 28, 2009
Jkt 220001
do 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 806b
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 806b is
amended as follows:
■
PART 806b—PRIVACY ACT PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR
part 806b continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Public Law 93–579, 88 Stat.
1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a).
2. Paragraph (e) of Appendix D to 32
CFR part 806b is amended by adding
paragraph (22) to read as follows:
■
Appendix D to Part 806b—General and
Specific Exemptions
*
*
*
*
*
(22) System identifier and name: F051
AFJA E, Judge Advocate General’s
Professional Conduct Files.
(i) Exemption: Investigatory material
compiled for law enforcement purposes,
other than material within the scope of
subsection 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), may be exempt
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2). However, if
an individual is denied any right, privilege,
or benefit for which he would otherwise be
entitled by Federal law, as a result of the
maintenance of the information, the
individual will be provided access to the
information except to the extent that
disclosure would reveal the identity of a
confidential source. Note: When claimed,
this exemption allows limited protection of
investigative reports maintained in a system
of records used in personnel or
administrative actions. Any portion of this
system of records which falls within the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) may be
exempt from the following subsections of 5
U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H),
and (I), and (f).
(ii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2).
(iii) Reasons: (A) From subsection (c)(3)
because to grant access to the accounting for
each disclosure as required by the Privacy
Act, including the date, nature, and purpose
of each disclosure and the identity of the
recipient, could alert the subject to the
existence of the investigation. This could
seriously compromise case preparation by
prematurely revealing its existence and
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
55785
nature; compromise or interfere with
witnesses or make witnesses reluctant to
cooperate; and lead to suppression,
alteration, or destruction of evidence.
(B) From subsections (d) and (f) because
providing access to investigative records 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.
(C) 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.
(D) 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).
(E) 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: October 7, 2009.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer,
Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. E9–26032 Filed 10–28–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Air Force
[Docket ID: USAF–2009–0021]
32 CFR Part 806b
Privacy Act; Implementation
AGENCY:
Department of the Air Force,
DoD.
ACTION: Final rule with request for
comments.
SUMMARY: The Department of the Air
Force is updating the Department of Air
Force Privacy Act Program Rules, 32
E:\FR\FM\29OCR1.SGM
29OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 208 (Thursday, October 29, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55784-55785]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-26032]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Air Force
[Docket ID: USAF-2009-0009]
32 CFR Part 806b
Privacy Act; Implementation
AGENCY: Department of Air Force, DoD.
ACTION: Final rule with request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Air Force is updating the Department of Air
Force Privacy Act Program Rules, 32 CFR part 806b, by adding the (k)(2)
exemption to accurately describe the basis for exempting the records.
The Privacy Act system of records notice, F051 AFJA E, entitled ``Judge
Advocate General's Professional Conduct Files'', has already been
published on December 31, 2008 (73 FR 80372).
DATES: The rule will be effective on December 28, 2009 unless comments
are received that would result in a contrary determination. Comments
will be accepted on or before December 28, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and
title, by any of the following methods.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
[[Page 55785]]
Mail: Federal Docket management System Office, 1160
Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-1160.
Intructions: 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: Mr. Kenneth Brodie at (703) 696-7557.
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 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''
It has been determined that Privacy Act rules for the Department of
Defense do 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 806b
Privacy.
0
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 806b is amended as follows:
PART 806b--PRIVACY ACT PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 806b continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Public Law 93-579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a).
0
2. Paragraph (e) of Appendix D to 32 CFR part 806b is amended by adding
paragraph (22) to read as follows:
Appendix D to Part 806b--General and Specific Exemptions
* * * * *
(22) System identifier and name: F051 AFJA E, Judge Advocate
General's Professional Conduct Files.
(i) Exemption: Investigatory material compiled for law
enforcement purposes, other than material within the scope of
subsection 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552a(k)(2). However, if an individual is denied any right,
privilege, or benefit for which he would otherwise be entitled by
Federal law, as a result of the maintenance of the information, the
individual will be provided access to the information except to the
extent that disclosure would reveal the identity of a confidential
source. Note: When claimed, this exemption allows limited protection
of investigative reports maintained in a system of records used in
personnel or administrative actions. Any portion of this system of
records which falls within the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) may
be exempt from the following subsections of 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3),
(d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I), and (f).
(ii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2).
(iii) Reasons: (A) From subsection (c)(3) because to grant
access to the accounting for each disclosure as required by the
Privacy Act, including the date, nature, and purpose of each
disclosure and the identity of the recipient, could alert the
subject to the existence of the investigation. This could seriously
compromise case preparation by prematurely revealing its existence
and nature; compromise or interfere with witnesses or make witnesses
reluctant to cooperate; and lead to suppression, alteration, or
destruction of evidence.
(B) From subsections (d) and (f) because providing access to
investigative records 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.
(C) 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.
(D) 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).
(E) 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: October 7, 2009.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. E9-26032 Filed 10-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P