Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of Exemptions; Department of Homeland Security/U.S. Coast Guard-008 Courts Martial Case Files System of Records, 27847-27848 [2011-11689]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
27847
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 76, No. 93
Friday, May 13, 2011
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
Office of the Secretary
6 CFR Part 5
rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal
Register, 73 FR 64899, October 31, 2008,
proposing to exempt portions of the
system of records from one or more
provisions of the Privacy Act because of
criminal, civil, and administrative
enforcement requirements. The system
of records is the DHS/USCG—008
Courts Martial Case Files System of
Records. The DHS/USCG—008 Courts
Martial Case Files system of records
notice (SORN) was published
concurrently in the Federal Register, 73
FR 64961, October 31, 2008. Comments
were invited on both the NPRM and the
SORN. Public comments were received
on the NPRM. No comments were
received on the SORN.
[Docket No. DHS–2011–0031]
Public Comments
Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of
Exemptions; Department of Homeland
Security/U.S. Coast Guard—008 Courts
Martial Case Files System of Records
DHS/USCG received two public
comments on the NPRM. The first
comment focused on the rights of an
individual stating that ‘‘in all criminal
prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy
the right to a speedy and public trial, by
an impartial jury of the state and district
where in the crime shall have been
committed, which district shall have
been previously ascertained by law, and
to be informed of the nature and cause
of the accusation; to be confronted with
the witnesses against him; to have
compulsory process for obtaining
witnesses in his favor, and to have the
assistance of counsel for his defense.″
This system will be used by the DHS/
USCG to collect and maintain records
on military and civilian employees of
the DHS/USCG who are tried by, or
involved with, a courts martial in the
DHS/USCG. By issuing these
exemptions, DHS/USCG is not
abdicating its duty to conduct fair and
impartial courts martial proceedings.
Rather, these exemptions only apply to
the Privacy Act and would not limit the
ability of an individual to obtain records
pursuant to other authorities, such as
applicable rules for courts martial.
The second public comment received
focused on withholding information
from a member of the DHS/USCG
uniformed service as a result of the
exemptions claimed in the proposed
rule. Exemptions claimed in the
proposed rule are neither designed nor
intended, without reason, to withhold
information from anyone. However, it is
occasionally necessary and appropriate
for the DHS/USCG to protect material
compiled for law enforcement purposes,
Privacy Office, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Department of Homeland
Security is issuing a final rule to amend
its regulations to exempt portions of a
Department of Homeland Security/U.S.
Coast Guard system of records titled,
‘‘Department of Homeland Security/U.S.
Coast Guard—008 Courts Martial Case
Files System of Records″ from certain
provisions of the Privacy Act.
Specifically, the Department exempts
portions of the Department of Homeland
Security/U.S. Coast Guard—008 Courts
Martial Case Files System of Records
from one or more provisions of the
Privacy Act because of criminal, civil,
and administrative enforcement
requirements.
SUMMARY:
Effective Date: This final rule is
effective May 13, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
general questions please contact: Eileen
Yenikaliotis (202–475–3530), Acting
Privacy Officer, U.S. Coast Guard. For
privacy issues please contact: Mary
Ellen Callahan (703–235–0780), Chief
Privacy Officer, Privacy Office, U.S.
Department of Homeland Security,
Washington, DC 20528.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
DATES:
Background
The Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) U.S. Coast Guard
(USCG) published a notice of proposed
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:13 May 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
including some records pertaining to
investigations, inquiries, and criminal
proceedings, as well as national security
and intelligence activities. No
comments were received on the system
of records notice. DHS will implement
the rulemaking as proposed.
List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5
Freedom of information; Privacy.
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:
■
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. Add at the end of Appendix C to
part 5, Exemption of Record Systems
under the Privacy Act, paragraph 54 to
read as follows:
■
Appendix C to Part 5—DHS Systems of
Records Exempt From the Privacy Act
*
*
*
*
*
12. The DHS/USCG—008 Courts Martial
Case Files System of Records consists of
electronic and paper records and will be used
by DHS/USCG. The DHS/USCG—008 Courts
Martial Case Files System of Records is a
repository of information held by DHS/USCG
in connection with its several and varied
missions and functions, including, but not
limited to: the enforcement of civil and
criminal laws; investigations, inquiries, and
proceedings thereunder; and national
security and intelligence activities. The DHS/
USCG—008 Courts Martial Case Files System
of Records contains information that is
collected by, on behalf of, in support of, or
in cooperation with DHS/USCG and may
contain personally identifiable information
collected by other federal, state, local, tribal,
foreign, or international government
agencies. The Secretary of Homeland
Security has exempted this system from the
following provisions of the Privacy Act,
subject to the limitations set forth in 5 U.S.C.
552a(c)(3) and (c)(4); (d); (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3),
(e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I), (e)(5) and (e)(8);
(f); and (g) pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2).
Additionally, the Secretary of Homeland
Security has exempted this system from the
following provisions of the Privacy Act,
subject to the limitations set forth in 5 U.S.C.
552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H),
(e)(4)(I); and (f) pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552a(k)(1) and (k)(2). Exemptions from these
particular subsections are justified, on a case-
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
27848
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
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, to tamper with witnesses or
evidence, and to 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, to tamper with
witnesses or evidence, and to 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
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 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 investigations by
revealing the existence of an otherwise
confidential investigation and thereby
provide an opportunity for the subject of an
investigation to conceal evidence, alter
patterns of behavior, or take other actions
that could thwart investigative efforts; reveal
the identity of witnesses in investigations,
thereby providing an opportunity for the
subjects of the investigations or others to
harass, intimidate, or otherwise interfere
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:13 May 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
with the collection of evidence or other
information from such witnesses; or reveal
the identity of confidential informants,
which would negatively affect the
informant’s usefulness in any ongoing or
future investigations and discourage
members of the public from cooperating as
confidential informants in any future
investigations.
(f) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H),
and (e)(4)(I) (Agency Requirements), and (f)
(Agency Rules) because portions of this
system are exempt from the individual access
provisions of subsection (d) for the reasons
noted above, and therefore DHS is not
required to establish requirements, rules, or
procedures with respect to such access.
Providing notice to individuals with respect
to existence of records pertaining to them in
the system of records or otherwise setting up
procedures pursuant to which individuals
may access and view records pertaining to
themselves in the system would undermine
investigative efforts and reveal the identities
of witnesses, and potential witnesses, and
confidential informants.
(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 DHS 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 DHS’ 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.
(i) From subsection (g) to the extent that
the system is exempt from other specific
subsections of the Privacy Act relating to
individuals’ rights to access and amend their
records contained in the system. Therefore
DHS is not required to establish rules or
procedures pursuant to which individuals
may seek a civil remedy for the agency’s:
refusal to amend a record; refusal to comply
with a request for access to records; failure
to maintain accurate, relevant, timely and
complete records; or failure to otherwise
comply with an individual’s right to access
or amend records.
Dated: April 19, 2011.
Mary Ellen Callahan,
Chief Privacy Officer, Department of
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2011–11689 Filed 5–12–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 927
[Doc. No. AMS–FV–10–0072; FV10–927–1
FIR]
Pears Grown in Oregon and
Washington; Amendment To Allow
Additional Exemptions
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Adoption of interim rule as
final.
AGENCY:
The Department of
Agriculture is adopting, as a final rule,
without change, an interim rule that
added an exemption to the marketing
order for Oregon-Washington pears that
provides for the sale of fresh pears
directly to consumers without regard to
regulation. For each customer, the
interim rule provided an exemption for
consumer-direct sales of up to 220
pounds of fresh pears per transaction,
for home use only, made directly at
orchards, packing facilities, roadside
stands, or farmers’ markets without
regard to the marketing order’s
assessment, reporting, handling, and
inspection requirements. This action is
intended to provide increased marketing
flexibility to small pear handlers, while
facilitating the sale of fresh, local pears
directly to consumers.
DATES: Effective May 16, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Teresa Hutchinson or Gary Olson,
Northwest Marketing Field Office,
Marketing Order Administration
Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,
AMS, USDA, Portland, Oregon;
Telephone: (503) 326–2724, Fax: (503)
326–7440, or E-mail:
Teresa.Hutchinson@ams.usda.gov or
Gary D.Olson@ams.usda.gov.
Small businesses may obtain
information on complying with this and
other marketing order regulations by
viewing a guide at the following Web
site: https://www.ams.usda.gov/
Marketing Orders Small Business Guide;
or by contacting Laurel May, 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:
Laurel.May@ams.usda.gov.
SUMMARY:
This rule
is issued under Marketing Order No.
927, as amended (7 CFR part 927),
regulating the handling of pears grown
in Oregon and Washington, hereinafter
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 93 (Friday, May 13, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27847-27848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-11689]
========================================================================
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. 76, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2011 / Rules and
Regulations
[[Page 27847]]
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Office of the Secretary
6 CFR Part 5
[Docket No. DHS-2011-0031]
Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of Exemptions; Department of
Homeland Security/U.S. Coast Guard--008 Courts Martial Case Files
System of Records
AGENCY: Privacy Office, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Security is issuing a final rule to
amend its regulations to exempt portions of a Department of Homeland
Security/U.S. Coast Guard system of records titled, ``Department of
Homeland Security/U.S. Coast Guard--008 Courts Martial Case Files
System of Records'' from certain provisions of the Privacy Act.
Specifically, the Department exempts portions of the Department of
Homeland Security/U.S. Coast Guard--008 Courts Martial Case Files
System of Records from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act
because of criminal, civil, and administrative enforcement
requirements.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective May 13, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general questions please contact:
Eileen Yenikaliotis (202-475-3530), Acting Privacy Officer, U.S. Coast
Guard. For privacy issues please contact: Mary Ellen Callahan (703-235-
0780), Chief Privacy Officer, Privacy Office, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)
published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal
Register, 73 FR 64899, October 31, 2008, proposing to exempt portions
of the system of records from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act
because of criminal, civil, and administrative enforcement
requirements. The system of records is the DHS/USCG--008 Courts Martial
Case Files System of Records. The DHS/USCG--008 Courts Martial Case
Files system of records notice (SORN) was published concurrently in the
Federal Register, 73 FR 64961, October 31, 2008. Comments were invited
on both the NPRM and the SORN. Public comments were received on the
NPRM. No comments were received on the SORN.
Public Comments
DHS/USCG received two public comments on the NPRM. The first
comment focused on the rights of an individual stating that ``in all
criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy
and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district where
in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been
previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and
cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against
him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor,
and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.'' This system
will be used by the DHS/USCG to collect and maintain records on
military and civilian employees of the DHS/USCG who are tried by, or
involved with, a courts martial in the DHS/USCG. By issuing these
exemptions, DHS/USCG is not abdicating its duty to conduct fair and
impartial courts martial proceedings. Rather, these exemptions only
apply to the Privacy Act and would not limit the ability of an
individual to obtain records pursuant to other authorities, such as
applicable rules for courts martial.
The second public comment received focused on withholding
information from a member of the DHS/USCG uniformed service as a result
of the exemptions claimed in the proposed rule. Exemptions claimed in
the proposed rule are neither designed nor intended, without reason, to
withhold information from anyone. However, it is occasionally necessary
and appropriate for the DHS/USCG to protect material compiled for law
enforcement purposes, including some records pertaining to
investigations, inquiries, and criminal proceedings, as well as
national security and intelligence activities. No comments were
received on the system of records notice. DHS will implement the
rulemaking as proposed.
List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5
Freedom of information; Privacy.
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. Add at the end of Appendix C to part 5, Exemption of Record Systems
under the Privacy Act, paragraph 54 to read as follows:
Appendix C to Part 5--DHS Systems of Records Exempt From the Privacy
Act
* * * * *
12. The DHS/USCG--008 Courts Martial Case Files System of
Records consists of electronic and paper records and will be used by
DHS/USCG. The DHS/USCG--008 Courts Martial Case Files System of
Records is a repository of information held by DHS/USCG in
connection with its several and varied missions and functions,
including, but not limited to: the enforcement of civil and criminal
laws; investigations, inquiries, and proceedings thereunder; and
national security and intelligence activities. The DHS/USCG--008
Courts Martial Case Files System of Records contains information
that is collected by, on behalf of, in support of, or in cooperation
with DHS/USCG and may contain personally identifiable information
collected by other federal, state, local, tribal, foreign, or
international government agencies. The Secretary of Homeland
Security has exempted this system from the following provisions of
the Privacy Act, subject to the limitations set forth in 5 U.S.C.
552a(c)(3) and (c)(4); (d); (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), (e)(4)(G),
(e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I), (e)(5) and (e)(8); (f); and (g) pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 552a(j)(2). Additionally, the Secretary of Homeland Security
has exempted this system from the following provisions of the
Privacy Act, subject to the limitations set forth in 5 U.S.C.
552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I); and (f)
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1) and (k)(2). Exemptions from these
particular subsections are justified, on a case-
[[Page 27848]]
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, to tamper with witnesses or
evidence, and to 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, to
tamper with witnesses or evidence, and to 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 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 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 investigations by revealing the existence
of an otherwise confidential investigation and thereby provide an
opportunity for the subject of an investigation to conceal evidence,
alter patterns of behavior, or take other actions that could thwart
investigative efforts; reveal the identity of witnesses in
investigations, thereby providing an opportunity for the subjects of
the investigations or others to harass, intimidate, or otherwise
interfere with the collection of evidence or other information from
such witnesses; or reveal the identity of confidential informants,
which would negatively affect the informant's usefulness in any
ongoing or future investigations and discourage members of the
public from cooperating as confidential informants in any future
investigations.
(f) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), and (e)(4)(I) (Agency
Requirements), and (f) (Agency Rules) because portions of this
system are exempt from the individual access provisions of
subsection (d) for the reasons noted above, and therefore DHS is not
required to establish requirements, rules, or procedures with
respect to such access. Providing notice to individuals with respect
to existence of records pertaining to them in the system of records
or otherwise setting up procedures pursuant to which individuals may
access and view records pertaining to themselves in the system would
undermine investigative efforts and reveal the identities of
witnesses, and potential witnesses, and confidential informants.
(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 DHS 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 DHS' 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.
(i) From subsection (g) to the extent that the system is exempt
from other specific subsections of the Privacy Act relating to
individuals' rights to access and amend their records contained in
the system. Therefore DHS is not required to establish rules or
procedures pursuant to which individuals may seek a civil remedy for
the agency's: refusal to amend a record; refusal to comply with a
request for access to records; failure to maintain accurate,
relevant, timely and complete records; or failure to otherwise
comply with an individual's right to access or amend records.
Dated: April 19, 2011.
Mary Ellen Callahan,
Chief Privacy Officer, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2011-11689 Filed 5-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
