Privacy Act; Implementation, 22614-22615 [2011-9740]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
22614
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
exempted from the requirements of
subsections (c)(3); (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4);
(e)(1) and (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I); and (f)
of the Privacy Act pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552a(k)(1). Records may be exempted
from these subsections or, additionally,
from the requirements of subsections
(c)(4); (e)(2), (3), and (8) of the Privacy
Act of 1974 consistent with any
exemptions claimed under 5 U.S.C.
552a (j)(2) or (k)(1), (k)(2), or (k)(5) by
the originator of the record, provided
the reason for the exemption remains
valid and necessary. An exemption rule
for this system has been promulgated in
accordance with the requirements of 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(1), (2), and (3), (c) and (e)
and is published at 32 CFR part 311.
(ii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a (j)(2),
(k)(1), (k)(2), or (k)(5).
(iii) Reasons: (A) From subsections
(c)(3) (accounting of disclosures)
because an accounting of disclosures
from records concerning the record
subject would specifically reveal an
intelligence or investigative interest on
the part of the Department of Defense
and could result in release of properly
classified national security or foreign
policy information.
(B) From subsections (d)(1), (2), (3)
and (4) (record subject’s right to access
and amend records) because affording
access and amendment rights could
alert the record subject to the
investigative interest of law enforcement
agencies or compromise sensitive
information classified in the interest of
national security. In the absence of a
national security basis for exemption,
records in this system may be exempted
from access and amendment to the
extent necessary to honor promises of
confidentiality to persons providing
information concerning a candidate for
position. Inability to maintain such
confidentiality would restrict the free
flow of information vital to a
determination of a candidate’s
qualifications and suitability.
(C) From subsection (e)(1) (maintain
only relevant and necessary records)
because in the collection of information
for investigatory purposes, it is not
always possible to determine the
relevance and necessity of particular
information in the early stages of the
investigation. It is only after the
information is evaluated in light of other
information that its relevance and
necessity becomes clear. In the absence
of a national security basis for
exemption under subjection (k)(1),
records in this system may be exempted
from the relevance requirement
pursuant to subjection (k)(5) because it
is not possible to determine in advance
what exact information may assist in
determining the qualifications and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
suitability of a candidate for position.
Seemingly irrelevant details, when
combined with other data, can provide
a useful composite for determining
whether a candidate should be
appointed.
(D) From subsections (e)(4)(G) and (H)
(publication of procedures for notifying
subject of the existence of records about
them and how they may access records
and contest contents) because the
system is exempted from subsection (d)
provisions regarding access and
amendment, and from the subsection (f)
requirement to promulgate agency rules.
Nevertheless, the Office of the Secretary
of Defense has published notice
concerning notification, access, and
contest procedures because it may, in
certain circumstances, determine it
appropriate to provide subjects access to
all or a portion of the records about
them in this system of records.
(E) From subsection (e)(4)(I)
(identifying sources of records in the
system of records) because identifying
sources could result in disclosure of
properly classified national defense or
foreign policy information, intelligence
sources and methods, and investigatory
techniques and procedures.
Notwithstanding its proposed
exemption from this requirement the
Office of the Secretary of Defense
identifies record sources in broad
categories sufficient to provide general
notice of the origins of the information
it maintains in this system of records.
(F) From subsection (f) (agency rules
for notifying subjects to the existence of
records about them, for accessing and
amending records, and for assessing
fees) because the system is exempt from
subsection (d) provisions regarding
access and amendment of records by
record subjects. Nevertheless, the Office
of the Secretary of Defense has
published agency rules concerning
notification of a subject in response to
his request if any system of records
named by the subject contains a record
pertaining to him and procedures by
which the subject may access or amend
the records. Notwithstanding
exemption, the Office of the Secretary of
Defense may determine it appropriate to
satisfy a record subject’s access request.
Dated: April 8, 2011.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer,
Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2011–9746 Filed 4–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The National Security
Agency/Central Security Services (NSA/
CSS) is adding 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: Effective Date: April 22, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Anne Hill at (301) 688–6527.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
proposed rule was published on May
19, 2008 (73 FR 28767–29768). No
comments were received.
SUMMARY:
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.
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Public Law 95–511, ‘‘Paperwork
Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been determined that Privacy
Act rules for the Department of Defense
impose no additional information
collection requirements on the public
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995.
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
amended as follows:
PART 322—[AMENDED]
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
redesignating paragraphs (r) and (s) as
paragraphs (s) and (t) and adding a new
paragraph (r) to read as follows:
■
§ 322.7
Exempt systems of records.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
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: April 8, 2011.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer,
Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2011–9740 Filed 4–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22615
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
[Docket ID: DoD–2011–OS–0003]
32 CFR Part 322
Privacy Act; Implementation
National Security Agency/
Central Security Service, DoD.
ACTION: Direct final rule with request for
comments.
AGENCY:
The National Security
Agency/Central Security Service is
deleting an exemption rule and adding
a new exemption rule. The exemption
rule for GNSA 13, entitled ‘‘Archive
Records’’ is being deleted in its entirety;
a new exemption rule for GNSA 28,
entitled ‘‘Freedom of Information Act,
Privacy Act and Mandatory
Declassification Review Records’’ is
being added to exempt those records
that have been previously claimed for
the records in another Privacy Act
system of records. To the extent that
copies of exempt records from those
other systems of records are entered into
these case records, NSA/CSS hereby
claims the same exemptions for the
records as claimed in the original
primary system of records of which they
are a part.
This direct final rule makes
nonsubstantive changes to the National
Security Agency/Central Security
Service Privacy Program rules. These
changes will allow the Department to
exempt records from certain portions of
the Privacy Act. This will improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of DoD’s
program by preserving 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.
This rule is being published as a
direct final rule as the Department of
Defense does not expect to receive any
adverse comments, and so a proposed
rule is unnecessary.
DATES: The rule will be effective on July
1, 2011 unless comments are received
that would result in a contrary
determination. Comments will be
accepted on or before June 21, 2011.
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.
• Mail: Federal Docket management
System Office, Room 3C843, 1160
Defense Pentagon, Room 3C843,
Washington, DC 20301–1160.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 78 (Friday, April 22, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22614-22615]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9740]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Security Agency/Central Security Services (NSA/
CSS) is adding 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: Effective Date: April 22, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Anne Hill at (301) 688-6527.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed rule was published on May 19,
2008 (73 FR 28767-29768). No comments were received.
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.
[[Page 22615]]
Public Law 95-511, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been determined that Privacy Act rules for the Department of
Defense impose no additional information collection requirements on the
public under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
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 amended as follows:
PART 322--[AMENDED]
0
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).
0
2. Section 322.7 is amended by redesignating paragraphs (r) and (s) as
paragraphs (s) and (t) and adding a new 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: April 8, 2011.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2011-9740 Filed 4-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
