Privacy Act; Implementation, 55781-55782 [E9-26051]

Download as PDF dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 208 / Thursday, October 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations the information exempt to the extent that disclosure would reveal the identify 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. (ii) Records maintained solely for statistical research or program evaluation purposes and which are not used to make decisions on the rights, benefits, or entitlement of an individual except for census records which may be disclosed under 13 U.S.C. 8, may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(4). (3) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2)(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 VerDate Nov<24>2008 14:45 Oct 28, 2009 Jkt 220001 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. E9–26040 Filed 10–28–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001–06–P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DoD–2009–OS–0006] 32 CFR Part 323 Privacy Act; Implementation Defense Logistics Agency, DoD. Final rule with request for comments. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) is updating the DLA Privacy Act Program Rules, 32 CFR part 323, by replacing the (k)(2) exemption with a (k)(5) exemption to more accurately describe the basis for exempting the records. The Privacy Act system of records notice, S500.20, entitled ‘‘Defense Logistics Agency Criminal Incident Reporting System Records’’, has already been published on January 22, 2009 (74 FR 4006). 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. You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods. • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 1160 Defense Pentagon, Room 3C843, 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 http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information. ADDRESSES: PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 55781 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Jody Sinkler at (703) 767–5045. 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 E:\FR\FM\29OCR1.SGM 29OCR1 55782 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 208 / Thursday, October 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 323 Privacy. ■ Accordingly, 32 CFR part 323 is amended as follows: PART 323—DLA PRIVACY ACT PROGRAM 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 323 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: Public Law 93–579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a). 2. Paragraph (b) of Appendix H to 32 CFR part 323 is revised to read as follows: ■ Appendix H to Part 323—DLA Exemption Rules dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES * * * * * b. ID: S500.20 (Specific exemption). 1. System name: Defense Logistics Agency Criminal Incident Reporting System Records. 2. Exemption: i. Parts of this system may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2) if the information is compiled and maintained by a component of the agency, which performs as its principal function any activity pertaining to the enforcement of criminal laws. ii. The specific sections of 5 U.S.C. 552a from which the system is to be exempted are 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (c)(4), (d), (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I), (e)(5), (f), and (g). 3. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2). 4. Reasons: i. From subsection (c)(3) because to grant access to an accounting of disclosures 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 or prosecutive interest by DLA or other agencies. 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 (c)(4), (d), and (f) because providing access to this information could result in the concealment, destruction or fabrication of evidence and jeopardize the safety and well being of informants, witnesses and their families, and law enforcement personnel and their families. Disclosure of this information could also reveal and render ineffectual investigative techniques, sources, and methods used by this component and could result in the invasion of privacy of individuals only incidentally related to an investigation. Investigatory material is exempt to the extent that the disclosure of such material would reveal the identity of a source who furnished the information to the Government under an express promise that the identity of the source would be held in confidence, or prior to September 27, 1975 under an implied promise that the identity of the source would VerDate Nov<24>2008 14:45 Oct 28, 2009 Jkt 220001 be held in confidence. This exemption will protect the identities of certain sources that would be otherwise unwilling to provide information to the Government. The exemption of the individual’s right of access to his/her records and the reasons therefor necessitate the exemptions of this system of records from the requirements of the other cited provisions. 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 subsection (e)(2) because collecting information to the fullest extent possible directly from the subject individual may or may not be practical in a criminal investigation. v. From subsection (e)(3) because supplying an individual with a form containing a Privacy Act Statement would tend to inhibit cooperation by many individuals involved in a criminal investigation. The effect would be somewhat adverse to established investigative methods and techniques. vi. From subsections (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I) because it will provide protection against notification of investigatory material which might alert a subject to the fact that an investigation of that individual is taking place, and the disclosure of which would weaken the on-going investigation, reveal investigatory techniques, and place confidential informants in jeopardy who furnished information under an express promise that the sources’ identity would be held in confidence (or prior to the effective date of the Act, under an implied promise). In addition, this system of records is exempt from the access provisions of subsection (d). vii. From subsection (e)(5) because the requirement that records be maintained with attention to accuracy, relevance, timeliness, and completeness would unfairly hamper the investigative process. It is the nature of law enforcement for investigations to uncover the commission of illegal acts at diverse stages. It is frequently impossible to determine initially what information is accurate, relevant, timely, and least of all complete. With the passage of time, seemingly irrelevant or untimely information may acquire new significance as further investigation brings new details to light. viii. From subsection (f) because the agency’s rules are inapplicable to those portions of the system that are exempt and would place the burden on the agency of either confirming or denying the existence of a record pertaining to a requesting individual might in itself provide an answer to that individual relating to an on-going investigation. The conduct of a successful investigation leading to the indictment of a criminal offender precludes the applicability of established agency rules relating to verification of record, disclosure of the record to the individual and record amendment procedures for this record system. ix. From subsection (g) because this system of records should be exempt to the extent PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 that the civil remedies relate to provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a from which this rule exempts the system. * * * * * Dated: October 7, 2009. Patricia L. Toppings, OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. E9–26051 Filed 10–28–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001–06–P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DoD–2009–OS–0008] 32 CFR Part 323 Privacy Act; Implementation Defense Logistics Agency, DoD. Final rule with request for comments. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The Defense Logistics Agency shall exempt those records contained in S510.30, Freedom of Information Act/ Privacy Act Requests and Administrative Appeal Records, 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 records when the purposes underlying the exemption for the original records are still valid and necessary to protect the contents of the records. The Privacy Act system of records notice has already been published on January 22, 2009 (74 FR 4009). 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: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 1160 Defense Pentagon, Room 3C843, 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 http://www.regulations.gov as they are E:\FR\FM\29OCR1.SGM 29OCR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 208 (Thursday, October 29, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55781-55782]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-26051]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Docket ID: DoD-2009-OS-0006]

32 CFR Part 323


Privacy Act; Implementation

AGENCY: Defense Logistics Agency, DoD.

ACTION: Final rule with request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) is updating the DLA Privacy 
Act Program Rules, 32 CFR part 323, by replacing the (k)(2) exemption 
with a (k)(5) exemption to more accurately describe the basis for 
exempting the records. The Privacy Act system of records notice, 
S500.20, entitled ``Defense Logistics Agency Criminal Incident 
Reporting System Records'', has already been published on January 22, 
2009 (74 FR 4006).

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: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 1160 
Defense Pentagon, Room 3C843, 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 http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any 
personal identifiers or contact information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Jody Sinkler at (703) 767-5045.

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

[[Page 55782]]

the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among 
the various levels of government.

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 323

    Privacy.

0
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 323 is amended as follows:

PART 323--DLA PRIVACY ACT PROGRAM

0
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 323 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority:  Public Law 93-579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a).


0
2. Paragraph (b) of Appendix H to 32 CFR part 323 is revised to read as 
follows:

Appendix H to Part 323--DLA Exemption Rules

* * * * *
    b. ID: S500.20 (Specific exemption).
    1. System name: Defense Logistics Agency Criminal Incident 
Reporting System Records.
    2. Exemption: i. Parts of this system may be exempt pursuant to 
5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2) if the information is compiled and maintained by 
a component of the agency, which performs as its principal function 
any activity pertaining to the enforcement of criminal laws.
    ii. The specific sections of 5 U.S.C. 552a from which the system 
is to be exempted are 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (c)(4), (d), (e)(1), 
(e)(2), (e)(3), (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I), (e)(5), (f), and (g).
    3. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2).
    4. Reasons: i. From subsection (c)(3) because to grant access to 
an accounting of disclosures 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 or prosecutive interest by DLA or other 
agencies. 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 (c)(4), (d), and (f) because providing 
access to this information could result in the concealment, 
destruction or fabrication of evidence and jeopardize the safety and 
well being of informants, witnesses and their families, and law 
enforcement personnel and their families. Disclosure of this 
information could also reveal and render ineffectual investigative 
techniques, sources, and methods used by this component and could 
result in the invasion of privacy of individuals only incidentally 
related to an investigation. Investigatory material is exempt to the 
extent that the disclosure of such material would reveal the 
identity of a source who furnished the information to the Government 
under an express promise that the identity of the source would be 
held in confidence, or prior to September 27, 1975 under an implied 
promise that the identity of the source would be held in confidence. 
This exemption will protect the identities of certain sources that 
would be otherwise unwilling to provide information to the 
Government. The exemption of the individual's right of access to 
his/her records and the reasons therefor necessitate the exemptions 
of this system of records from the requirements of the other cited 
provisions.
    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 subsection (e)(2) because collecting information to the 
fullest extent possible directly from the subject individual may or 
may not be practical in a criminal investigation.
    v. From subsection (e)(3) because supplying an individual with a 
form containing a Privacy Act Statement would tend to inhibit 
cooperation by many individuals involved in a criminal 
investigation. The effect would be somewhat adverse to established 
investigative methods and techniques.
    vi. From subsections (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I) because it will 
provide protection against notification of investigatory material 
which might alert a subject to the fact that an investigation of 
that individual is taking place, and the disclosure of which would 
weaken the on-going investigation, reveal investigatory techniques, 
and place confidential informants in jeopardy who furnished 
information under an express promise that the sources' identity 
would be held in confidence (or prior to the effective date of the 
Act, under an implied promise). In addition, this system of records 
is exempt from the access provisions of subsection (d).
    vii. From subsection (e)(5) because the requirement that records 
be maintained with attention to accuracy, relevance, timeliness, and 
completeness would unfairly hamper the investigative process. It is 
the nature of law enforcement for investigations to uncover the 
commission of illegal acts at diverse stages. It is frequently 
impossible to determine initially what information is accurate, 
relevant, timely, and least of all complete. With the passage of 
time, seemingly irrelevant or untimely information may acquire new 
significance as further investigation brings new details to light.
    viii. From subsection (f) because the agency's rules are 
inapplicable to those portions of the system that are exempt and 
would place the burden on the agency of either confirming or denying 
the existence of a record pertaining to a requesting individual 
might in itself provide an answer to that individual relating to an 
on-going investigation. The conduct of a successful investigation 
leading to the indictment of a criminal offender precludes the 
applicability of established agency rules relating to verification 
of record, disclosure of the record to the individual and record 
amendment procedures for this record system.
    ix. From subsection (g) because this system of records should be 
exempt to the extent that the civil remedies relate to provisions of 
5 U.S.C. 552a from which this rule exempts the system.
* * * * *

    Dated: October 7, 2009.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. E9-26051 Filed 10-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P