Privacy Act; Implementation, 49658-49659 [2011-20238]
Download as PDF
wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with RULES
49658
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
or host nation prosecution and civil
liability.13
(2) Proof of authorization to be armed
must be carried by each PSC personnel.
(3) PSC personnel may possess only
U.S.G.-issued and/or -approved
weapons and ammunition for which
they have been qualified according to
paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E) of this section.
(4) PSC personnel were briefed about
and understand limitations on the use of
force.
(5) Authorization to possess weapons
and ammunition may be revoked for
non-compliance with established rules
for the use of force.
(6) PSC personnel are prohibited from
consuming alcoholic beverages or being
under the influence of alcohol while
armed.
(iv) Registration and identification in
the Synchronized Predeployment and
Operational Tracker (or its successor
database) of armored vehicles,
helicopters, and other vehicles operated
by PSC personnel.
(v) Reporting alleged criminal activity
or other incidents involving PSCs or
PSC personnel by another company or
any other person. All incidents
involving the following shall be
reported and documented:
(A) A weapon is discharged by an
individual performing private security
functions;
(B) An individual performing private
security functions is killed or injured in
the performance of their duties;
(C) A person other than an individual
performing private security functions is
killed or injured as a result of conduct
by PSC personnel;
(D) Property is destroyed as a result of
conduct by a PSC or PSC personnel;
(E) An individual performing private
security functions has come under
attack including in cases where a
weapon is discharged against an
individual performing private security
functions or personnel performing such
functions believe a weapon was so
discharged; or
(F) Active, non-lethal countermeasures (other than the discharge of a
weapon) are employed by PSC
personnel in response to a perceived
immediate threat in an incident that
could significantly affect U.S. objectives
with regard to the military mission or
international relations. (Active nonlethal systems include laser optical
13 This requirement is specific to arming
procedures. Such written acknowledgement should
not be construed to limit potential civil and
criminal liability to conduct arising from ‘‘the use
of weapons.’’ For example, PSC personnel could be
held criminally liable for any conduct that would
constitute a Federal offense (see MEJA, 18 U.S.C.
3261(a)).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:30 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
distracters, acoustic hailing devices,
electro-muscular TASER guns, blunttrauma devices like rubber balls and
sponge grenades, and a variety of riotcontrol agents and delivery systems).
(vi) The independent review and, if
practicable, investigation of incidents
reported pursuant to paragraphs
(a)(1)(v)(A) through (a)(1)(v)(F) of this
section and incidents of alleged
misconduct by PSC personnel.
(vii) Identification of ultimate
criminal jurisdiction and investigative
responsibilities, where conduct of
U.S.G.-funded PSCs or PSC personnel
are in question, in accordance with
applicable laws to include a recognition
of investigative jurisdiction and
coordination for joint investigations
(i.e., other U.S.G. agencies, host nation,
or third country agencies), where the
conduct of PSCs and PSC personnel is
in question.
(viii) A mechanism by which a
commander of a combatant command
may request an action by which PSC
personnel who are non-compliant with
contract requirements are removed from
the designated operational area.
(ix) Interagency coordination of
administrative penalties or removal, as
appropriate, of non-DoD PSC personnel
who fail to comply with the terms and
conditions of their contract, as they
relate to this part.
(x) Implementation of the training
requirements contained below in
paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section.
(2) Specifically cover:
(i) Matters relating to authorized
equipment, force protection, security,
health, safety, and relations and
interaction with locals in accordance
with DoD Instruction 3020.41,
‘‘Contractor Personnel Authorized to
Accompany the U.S. Armed Forces.’’
(ii) Predeployment training
requirements addressing, at a minimum,
the identification of resources and
assistance available to PSC personnel as
well as country information and cultural
training, and guidance on working with
host country nationals and military
personnel.
(iii) Rules for the use of force and
graduated force procedures.
(iv) Requirements and procedures for
direction, control and the maintenance
of communications with regard to the
movement and coordination of PSCs
and PSC personnel, including
specifying interoperability
requirements. These include
coordinating with the Chief of Mission,
as necessary, private security operations
outside secure bases and U.S.
diplomatic properties to include
movement control procedures for all
contractors, including PSC personnel.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(b) Availability of Guidance and
Procedures. The geographic Combatant
Commander shall ensure the guidance
and procedures prescribed in paragraph
(a) of this section are readily available
and accessible by PSCs and their
personnel (e.g., on a Web page and/or
through contract terms), consistent with
security considerations and
requirements.
(c) Subordinate Guidance and
Procedures. A sub unified commander
or JFC, in consultation with the Chief of
Mission, will issue guidance and
procedures implementing the standing
combatant command publications
specified in paragraph (a) of this
section, consistent with the situation
and operating environment.
(d) Consultation and Coordination.
The Chief of Mission and the geographic
Combatant Commander/sub unified
commander or JFC shall make every
effort to consult and coordinate
responses to common threats and
common concerns related to oversight of
the conduct of U.S.G.-funded PSCs and
their personnel.
Dated: August 3, 2011.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer,
Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2011–20239 Filed 8–10–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 319
[Docket ID DOD–2011–OS–0022]
Privacy Act; Implementation
AGENCY:
Defense Intelligence Agency,
DoD.
Direct final rule with request for
comments.
ACTION:
The Defense Intelligence
Agency is deleting an exemption rule
for LDIA 0275, ‘‘DoD Hotline Referrals’’
in its entirety. This direct final rule
makes nonsubstantive changes to the
Defense Intelligence Agency Privacy
Program rules. These changes will allow
the Department to transfer these records
to another system of records LDIA 0271,
‘‘Investigations and Complaints’’ (July
19, 2006, 71 FR 41006). 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 are
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
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\11AUR1.SGM
11AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with RULES
expect to receive any adverse
comments, and so a proposed rule is
unnecessary.
DATES: The rule will be effective on
October 20, 2011 unless comments are
received that would result in a contrary
determination. Comments will be
accepted on or before October 11, 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, 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
https://www.regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Theresa Lowery at (202) 231–1193.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Direct Final Rule and Significant
Adverse Comments
DoD has determined this rulemaking
meets the criteria for a direct final rule
because it involves nonsubstantive
changes dealing with DoD’s
management of its Privacy Progams.
DoD expects no opposition to the
changes and no significant adverse
comments. However, if DoD receives a
significant adverse comment, the
Department will withdraw this direct
final rule by publishing a notice in the
Federal Register. A significant adverse
comment is one that explains: (1) Why
the direct final rule is inappropriate,
including challenges to the rule’s
underlying premise or approach; or
(2) why the direct final rule will be
ineffective or unacceptable without a
change. In determining whether a
comment necessitates withdrawal of
this direct final rule, DoD will consider
whether it warrants a substantive
response in a notice and comment
process.
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ and Executive
Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation
and Regulatory Review’’
It has been determined that Privacy
Act rules for the Department of Defense
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:30 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
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 these Executive orders.
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 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 the
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 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 319
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR 319 is amended
as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
49659
PART 319—DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE
AGENCY PRIVACY PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR
part 319 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 5 U.S.C. 552a(f)
and (k).
2. In § 319.13 remove and reserve
paragraph (d) to read as follows:
■
§ 319.13
Specific exemptions.
*
*
*
*
(d) [Reserved].
*
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: July 8, 2011.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer,
Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2011–20238 Filed 8–10–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 319
[Docket ID DOD–2011–OS–0087]
Privacy Act; Implementation
AGENCY:
Defense Intelligence Agency,
DoD.
Direct final rule with request for
comments.
ACTION:
The Defense Intelligence
Agency (DIA) is adding a new
exemption rule for LDIA 0900, entitled
‘‘Accounts Receivable, Indebtedness
and Claims’’ 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, DIA 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 Defense Intelligence
Agency 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.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\11AUR1.SGM
11AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 155 (Thursday, August 11, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49658-49659]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20238]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 319
[Docket ID DOD-2011-OS-0022]
Privacy Act; Implementation
AGENCY: Defense Intelligence Agency, DoD.
ACTION: Direct final rule with request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Defense Intelligence Agency is deleting an exemption rule
for LDIA 0275, ``DoD Hotline Referrals'' in its entirety. This direct
final rule makes nonsubstantive changes to the Defense Intelligence
Agency Privacy Program rules. These changes will allow the Department
to transfer these records to another system of records LDIA 0271,
``Investigations and Complaints'' (July 19, 2006, 71 FR 41006). 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 are 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
[[Page 49659]]
expect to receive any adverse comments, and so a proposed rule is
unnecessary.
DATES: The rule will be effective on October 20, 2011 unless comments
are received that would result in a contrary determination. Comments
will be accepted on or before October 11, 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, 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 https://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Theresa Lowery at (202) 231-1193.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Direct Final Rule and Significant Adverse Comments
DoD has determined this rulemaking meets the criteria for a direct
final rule because it involves nonsubstantive changes dealing with
DoD's management of its Privacy Progams. DoD expects no opposition to
the changes and no significant adverse comments. However, if DoD
receives a significant adverse comment, the Department will withdraw
this direct final rule by publishing a notice in the Federal Register.
A significant adverse comment is one that explains: (1) Why the direct
final rule is inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's
underlying premise or approach; or (2) why the direct final rule will
be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. In determining whether
a comment necessitates withdrawal of this direct final rule, DoD will
consider whether it warrants a substantive response in a notice and
comment process.
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' and Executive
Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory 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 these Executive orders.
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 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 the 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 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 319
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR 319 is amended as follows:
PART 319--DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY PRIVACY PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 319 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Pub. L. 93-579, 5 U.S.C. 552a(f) and (k).
0
2. In Sec. 319.13 remove and reserve paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 319.13 Specific exemptions.
* * * * *
(d) [Reserved].
* * * * *
Dated: July 8, 2011.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2011-20238 Filed 8-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P