Privacy Act; Implementation, 32554-32556 [2013-12741]
Download as PDF
32554
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 105 / Friday, May 31, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
The FAA’s authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the United States Code.
Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator.
Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the
agency’s authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, Part A,
Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that
section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use
of airspace necessary to ensure the
safety of aircraft and the efficient use of
airspace. This regulation is within the
scope of that authority as it establishes
controlled airspace at St. Andrews
Hospital Heliport, Boothbay, ME.
Environmental Review
The FAA has determined that this
action qualifies for categorical exclusion
under the National Environmental
Policy Act in accordance with FAA
Order 1050.1E, ‘‘Environmental
Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’
paragraph 311a. This airspace action is
not expected to cause any potentially
significant environmental impacts, and
no extraordinary circumstances exist
that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.
Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (Air).
Adoption of the Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
PART 71 —DESIGNATION OF CLASS
A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS;
AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
1. The authority citation for Part 71
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113,
40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–
1963 Comp., p. 389.
§ 71.1
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9W,
Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 8, 2012, effective
September 15, 2012, is amended as
follows:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
■
Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas
Extending Upward From 700 feet or More
Above the Surface of the Earth.
*
*
*
*
*
ANE ME E5 Boothbay, ME [New]
St. Andrews Hospital Heliport, ME
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 May 30, 2013
Jkt 229001
(Lat. 43°51′02″ N., long. 69°38′16″ W.)
Point in Space Coordinates
(Lat. 43°50′40″ N., long. 69°37′32″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 6-mile radius
of the Point in Space Coordinates (lat.
43°50′40″ N., long. 69°37′32″ W.) serving St.
Andrews Hospital Heliport.
Issued in College Park, Georgia, on May 21,
2013.
Jackson Allen,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group,
Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2013–12769 Filed 5–30–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
32 CFR Part 320
[Docket ID: DoD–2013–OS–0122]
Privacy Act; Implementation
National GeospatialIntelligence Agency (NGA), DoD.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: National GeospatialIntelligence Agency (NGA) is proposing
to update the NGA Privacy Act Program
by adding the (j)(2) and (k)(2)
exemptions to accurately describe the
basis for exempting the records in the
system of records notice NGA–004,
NGA Threat Mitigation Records. In
addition, exempt materials from
JUSTICE/FBI–019 Terrorist Screening
Records System may become part of the
case records in this system of records.
To the extent that copies of exempt
records from JUSTICE/FBI–019,
Terrorist Screening Records System are
entered into these Threat Mitigation
case records, NGA hereby claims the
same exemptions for the records as
claimed in JUSTICE/FBI–019, Terrorist
Screening Records system of records of
which they are a part.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective
on July 30, 2013. Comments due on or
before July 1, 2013. If adverse comments
are received, DOD will publish a timely
withdrawal of the rule in the Federal
Register.
You may submit comments,
identified by docket number and title,
by any of the following methods:
* Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
* Mail: Federal Docket Management
System Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive;
East Tower, 2nd Floor, Suite 02G09,
Alexandria, VA 22350–3100.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
(NGA), ATTN: Security Specialist,
Mission Support, MSRS P–12, 7500
GEOINT Drive, Springfield, VA 22150.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Direct Final Rule and Significant
Adverse Comments
Office of the Secretary
ADDRESSES:
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number 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.
DoD has determined this rulemaking
meets the criteria for a direct final rule
because it involves changes dealing
with DoD’s management of its Privacy
Programs. 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.
Background
This direct final rule makes changes
to the National Geospatial-Intelligence
Agency (NGA) Program rules. These
changes will allow the Department to
add exemption rules to the NGA Privacy
Program rules that will exempt
applicable Department records and/or
material from certain portions of the
Privacy Act. This will improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of DoD’s
program by ensuring the integrity of the
security and counterintelligence records
by the National Geospatial-Intelligence
Agency and the Department of Defense.
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.
In 2008, the United States Congress
passed legislation that obligated the
Secretary of Defense to develop access
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 105 / Friday, May 31, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
standards for individuals entering
military installations. The Department
of Defense (DoD) developed a visitor
database to manage multiple criminal
and security sensitive databases that are
capable of identifying individuals
seeking access to DoD installations who
are believed to be criminal and security
threats. The purpose of the vetting
database is to screen individuals
wishing to enter a DoD facility, to
include those who have been previously
given authority to access DoD
installations, against the the Terrorist
Screening Records. These records have
properly documented exemption rules
and to the extent that copies of exempt
records are a part of the NGA Threat
Mitigation Records, NGA hereby claims
the same exemptions for the records as
claimed in JUSTICE/FBI–019, Terrorist
Screening Records of which they are a
part.
Section 202, Public Law 104–4,
‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’
Regulatory Procedures
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 320
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ and Executive
Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation
and Regulatory Review’’
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 320 is
amended as follows:
It has been determined that this rule
is not a significant rule. This rule does
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)
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
This rule will 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. A
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not
required.
Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork
Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
This direct final rule does not contain
any information collection requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 May 30, 2013
Jkt 229001
These amendments 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 will not significantly or uniquely
affect small governments.
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’
Executive Order 13132 requires
regulations be reviewed for Federalism
effects on the institutional interest of
states and local governments, and if the
effects are sufficiently substantial,
preparation of the Federal assessment is
required to assist senior policy makers.
The amendments will not have any
substantial direct effects on state and
local governments within the meaning
of the EO. Therefore, no Federalism
assessment is required.
PART 320—NATIONAL GEOSPATIAL—
INTELLIGENCE AGENCY (NGA)
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR
part 320 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5
U.S.C. 552a).
2. In § 320.12, add paragraph (c) to
read as follows:
■
§ 320.12
Exemptions.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) System identifier and name: NGA–
004, NGA Threat Mitigation Records.
(1) Exemptions: Exempt materials
from JUSTICE/FBI–019 Terrorist
Screening Records System may become
part of the case records in this system
of records. To the extent that copies of
exempt records from JUSTICE/FBI–019,
Terrorist Screening Records System are
entered into these Threat Mitigation
case records, NGA hereby claims the
same exemptions (j)(2) and (k)(2), for the
records as claimed in JUSTICE/FBI–019,
Terrorist Screening Records system of
records of which they are a part.
(2) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2) and
(k)(2).
(3) Reasons: (i)Pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552a(j)(2) and (k)(2), NGA is claiming
the following exemptions for certain
records within the Threat Mitigation
Records system: 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and
(4); (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4); (e)(1), (2), (3),
(4)(G) through (I), (5), and (8); (f), and
(g).
(ii) In addition to records under the
control of NGA, the Threat Mitigation
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
32555
system of records may include records
originating from systems of records of
other law enforcement and intelligence
agencies which may be exempt from
certain provisions of the Privacy Act.
However, NGA does not assert
exemption to any provisions of the
Privacy Act with respect to information
submitted by or on behalf of
individuals.
(iii) To the extent the Threat
Mitigation system contains records
originating from other systems of
records, NGA will rely on the
exemptions claimed for those records in
the originating system of records.
Exemptions for certain records within
the Threat Mitigation system from
particular subsections of the Privacy Act
are justified for the following reasons:
(A) From subsection (c)(3)
(Accounting for Disclosures) because
giving a record subject access to the
accounting of disclosures from records
concerning him or her could reveal
investigative interest on the part of the
recipient agency that obtained the
record pursuant to a routine use.
Disclosure of the accounting could
therefore present a serious impediment
to law enforcement efforts on the part of
the recipient agency because the
individual who is the subject of the
record would learn of third agency
investigative interests and could take
steps to evade detection or
apprehension. Disclosure of the
accounting also could reveal the details
of watch list matching measures under
the Threat Mitigation system, as well as
capabilities and vulnerabilities of the
watch list matching process, the release
of which could permit an individual to
evade future detection and thereby
impede efforts to ensure security.
(B) From subsection (c)(4) because
portions of this system are exempt from
the access and amendment provisions of
subsection (d).
(C) From subsections (d)(1), (2), (3),
and (4) because these provisions
concern individual access to and
amendment of certain records contained
in this system, including law
enforcement counterterrorism,
investigatory and intelligence records.
Compliance with these provisions could
alert the subject of an investigation of
the fact and nature of the investigation,
and/or the investigative interest of
intelligence or law enforcement
agencies; compromise sensitive
information related to national security;
interfere with the overall law
enforcement process by leading to the
destruction of evidence, improper
influencing of witnesses, fabrication of
testimony, and/or flight of the subject;
identify a confidential source or
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
32556
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 105 / Friday, May 31, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
disclose information which would
constitute an unwarranted invasion of
another’s personal privacy; reveal a
sensitive investigative or intelligence
technique; or constitute a potential
danger to the health or safety of law
enforcement personnel, confidential
informants, and witnesses. Amendment
of these records would interfere with
ongoing counterterrorism, law
enforcement, or intelligence
investigations and analysis activities
and impose an impossible
administrative burden by requiring
investigations, analyses, and reports to
be continuously reinvestigated and
revised.
(D) From subsection (e)(1) because it
is not always possible for NGA or other
agencies to know in advance what
information is both relevant and
necessary for it to complete an identity
comparison between individuals and a
known or suspected terrorist. In
addition, because NGA and other
agencies may not always know what
information about an encounter with a
known or suspected terrorist will be
relevant to law enforcement for the
purpose of conducting an operational
response.
(E) From subsection (e)(2) because
application of this provision could
present a serious impediment to
counterterrorism, law enforcement, or
intelligence efforts in that it would put
the subject of an investigation, study or
analysis on notice of that fact, thereby
permitting the subject to engage in
conduct designed to frustrate or impede
that activity. The nature of
counterterrorism, law enforcement, or
intelligence investigations is such that
vital information about an individual
frequently can be obtained only from
other persons who are familiar with
such individual and his/her activities.
In such investigations, it is not feasible
to rely upon information furnished by
the individual concerning his own
activities.
(F) From subsection (e)(3), to the
extent that this subsection is interpreted
to require NGA to provide notice to an
individual if NGA or another agency
receives or collects information about
that individual during an investigation
or from a third party. Should the
subsection be so interpreted, exemption
from this provision is necessary to avoid
impeding counterterrorism, law
enforcement, or intelligence efforts by
putting the subject of an investigation,
study or analysis on notice of that fact,
thereby permitting the subject to engage
in conduct intended to frustrate or
impede that activity.
(G) From subsections (e)(4)(G) and (H)
(Agency Requirements) and (f) (Agency
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 May 30, 2013
Jkt 229001
Rules), because this system is exempt
from the access provisions of 5 U.S.C.
552a(d).
(H) From subsection (e)(5) because
many of the records in this system
coming from other system of records are
derived from other agency record
systems and therefore it is not possible
for NGA to ensure their compliance
with this provision, however, NGA has
implemented internal quality assurance
procedures to ensure that data used in
the matching process is as thorough,
accurate, and current as possible. In
addition, in the collection of
information for law enforcement,
counterterrorism, and intelligence
purposes, it is impossible to determine
in advance what information is
accurate, relevant, timely, and complete.
With the passage of time, seemingly
irrelevant or untimely information may
acquire new significance as further
investigation brings new details to light.
The restrictions imposed by (e)(5)
would limit the ability of those
agencies’ trained investigators and
intelligence analysts to exercise their
judgment in conducting investigations
and impede the development of
intelligence necessary for effective law
enforcement and counterterrorism
efforts. However, NGA has implemented
internal quality assurance procedures to
ensure that the data used in the
matching process is as thorough,
accurate, and current as possible.
(I) From subsection (e)(8) because to
require individual notice of disclosure
of information due to compulsory legal
process would pose an impossible
administrative burden on NGA and
other agencies and could alert the
subjects of counterterrorism, law
enforcement, or intelligence
investigations to the fact of those
investigations when not previously
known.
(J) From subsection (f) (Agency Rules)
because portions of this system are
exempt from the access and amendment
provisions of subsection (d).
(K) From subsection (g) to the extent
that the system is exempt from other
specific subsections of the Privacy Act.
Dated: May 23, 2013.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2013–12741 Filed 5–30–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 164
Navigation Underway; Tankers
CFR Correction
In Title 33 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, Parts 125 to 199, revised as
of July 1, 2012, on page 598, after the
source note for § 164.13, the effective
date note is reinstated to read as
follows: ‘‘EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: At 58 FR
36141, July 6, 1993, § 164.13 was
amended by suspending paragraph (e),
effective July 9, 1993.’’
[FR Doc. 2013–13014 Filed 5–30–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505–01–D
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2013–0378]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; 2013 Ocean City Air
Show, Atlantic Ocean; Ocean City, MD
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
establishing a temporary safety zone on
the navigable waters of the Atlantic
Ocean in the vicinity of Ocean City, MD
to support the Ocean City Air Show.
This action is intended to restrict vessel
traffic movement in the restricted area
in order to protect mariners from the
hazards associated with air show events.
DATES: This rule is effective from June
6, 2013, at 10 a.m. until June 9, 2013,
at 4 p.m. This rule will be enforced from
10 a.m. until 4 p.m. daily between June
6, 2013, and June 9, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in
this preamble are part of docket [USCG–
2013–0378]. To view documents
mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov, type the docket
number in the ‘‘SEARCH″ box and click
‘‘SEARCH.″ Click on Open Docket
Folder on the line associated with this
rulemaking. You may also visit the
Docket Management Facility in Room
W12–140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 105 (Friday, May 31, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32554-32556]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12741]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 320
[Docket ID: DoD-2013-OS-0122]
Privacy Act; Implementation
AGENCY: National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), DoD.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) is proposing to
update the NGA Privacy Act Program by adding the (j)(2) and (k)(2)
exemptions to accurately describe the basis for exempting the records
in the system of records notice NGA-004, NGA Threat Mitigation Records.
In addition, exempt materials from JUSTICE/FBI-019 Terrorist Screening
Records System may become part of the case records in this system of
records. To the extent that copies of exempt records from JUSTICE/FBI-
019, Terrorist Screening Records System are entered into these Threat
Mitigation case records, NGA hereby claims the same exemptions for the
records as claimed in JUSTICE/FBI-019, Terrorist Screening Records
system of records of which they are a part.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective on July 30, 2013. Comments
due on or before July 1, 2013. If adverse comments are received, DOD
will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and
title, by any of the following methods:
* Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
* Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 4800 Mark Center
Drive; East Tower, 2nd Floor, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number 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: National Geospatial-Intelligence
Agency (NGA), ATTN: Security Specialist, Mission Support, MSRS P-12,
7500 GEOINT Drive, Springfield, VA 22150.
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 changes dealing with DoD's management of
its Privacy Programs. 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.
Background
This direct final rule makes changes to the National Geospatial-
Intelligence Agency (NGA) Program rules. These changes will allow the
Department to add exemption rules to the NGA Privacy Program rules that
will exempt applicable Department records and/or material from certain
portions of the Privacy Act. This will improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of DoD's program by ensuring the integrity of the
security and counterintelligence records by the National Geospatial-
Intelligence Agency and the Department of Defense.
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.
In 2008, the United States Congress passed legislation that
obligated the Secretary of Defense to develop access
[[Page 32555]]
standards for individuals entering military installations. The
Department of Defense (DoD) developed a visitor database to manage
multiple criminal and security sensitive databases that are capable of
identifying individuals seeking access to DoD installations who are
believed to be criminal and security threats. The purpose of the
vetting database is to screen individuals wishing to enter a DoD
facility, to include those who have been previously given authority to
access DoD installations, against the the Terrorist Screening Records.
These records have properly documented exemption rules and to the
extent that copies of exempt records are a part of the NGA Threat
Mitigation Records, NGA hereby claims the same exemptions for the
records as claimed in JUSTICE/FBI-019, Terrorist Screening Records of
which they are a part.
Regulatory Procedures
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' and Executive
Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review''
It has been determined that this rule is not a significant rule.
This rule does 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)
This rule will 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. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not
required.
Public Law 96-511, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
This direct final rule does not contain any information collection
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.).
Section 202, Public Law 104-4, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act''
These amendments 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 will
not significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism''
Executive Order 13132 requires regulations be reviewed for
Federalism effects on the institutional interest of states and local
governments, and if the effects are sufficiently substantial,
preparation of the Federal assessment is required to assist senior
policy makers. The amendments will not have any substantial direct
effects on state and local governments within the meaning of the EO.
Therefore, no Federalism assessment is required.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 320
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 320 is amended as follows:
PART 320--NATIONAL GEOSPATIAL--INTELLIGENCE AGENCY (NGA)
0
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 320 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Pub. L. 93-579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a).
0
2. In Sec. 320.12, add paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 320.12 Exemptions.
* * * * *
(c) System identifier and name: NGA-004, NGA Threat Mitigation
Records.
(1) Exemptions: Exempt materials from JUSTICE/FBI-019 Terrorist
Screening Records System may become part of the case records in this
system of records. To the extent that copies of exempt records from
JUSTICE/FBI-019, Terrorist Screening Records System are entered into
these Threat Mitigation case records, NGA hereby claims the same
exemptions (j)(2) and (k)(2), for the records as claimed in JUSTICE/
FBI-019, Terrorist Screening Records system of records of which they
are a part.
(2) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2) and (k)(2).
(3) Reasons: (i)Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2) and (k)(2), NGA is
claiming the following exemptions for certain records within the Threat
Mitigation Records system: 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (4); (d)(1), (2),
(3), and (4); (e)(1), (2), (3), (4)(G) through (I), (5), and (8); (f),
and (g).
(ii) In addition to records under the control of NGA, the Threat
Mitigation system of records may include records originating from
systems of records of other law enforcement and intelligence agencies
which may be exempt from certain provisions of the Privacy Act.
However, NGA does not assert exemption to any provisions of the Privacy
Act with respect to information submitted by or on behalf of
individuals.
(iii) To the extent the Threat Mitigation system contains records
originating from other systems of records, NGA will rely on the
exemptions claimed for those records in the originating system of
records. Exemptions for certain records within the Threat Mitigation
system from particular subsections of the Privacy Act are justified for
the following reasons:
(A) From subsection (c)(3) (Accounting for Disclosures) because
giving a record subject access to the accounting of disclosures from
records concerning him or her could reveal investigative interest on
the part of the recipient agency that obtained the record pursuant to a
routine use. Disclosure of the accounting could therefore present a
serious impediment to law enforcement efforts on the part of the
recipient agency because the individual who is the subject of the
record would learn of third agency investigative interests and could
take steps to evade detection or apprehension. Disclosure of the
accounting also could reveal the details of watch list matching
measures under the Threat Mitigation system, as well as capabilities
and vulnerabilities of the watch list matching process, the release of
which could permit an individual to evade future detection and thereby
impede efforts to ensure security.
(B) From subsection (c)(4) because portions of this system are
exempt from the access and amendment provisions of subsection (d).
(C) From subsections (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4) because these
provisions concern individual access to and amendment of certain
records contained in this system, including law enforcement
counterterrorism, investigatory and intelligence records. Compliance
with these provisions could alert the subject of an investigation of
the fact and nature of the investigation, and/or the investigative
interest of intelligence or law enforcement agencies; compromise
sensitive information related to national security; interfere with the
overall law enforcement process by leading to the destruction of
evidence, improper influencing of witnesses, fabrication of testimony,
and/or flight of the subject; identify a confidential source or
[[Page 32556]]
disclose information which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of
another's personal privacy; reveal a sensitive investigative or
intelligence technique; or constitute a potential danger to the health
or safety of law enforcement personnel, confidential informants, and
witnesses. Amendment of these records would interfere with ongoing
counterterrorism, law enforcement, or intelligence investigations and
analysis activities and impose an impossible administrative burden by
requiring investigations, analyses, and reports to be continuously
reinvestigated and revised.
(D) From subsection (e)(1) because it is not always possible for
NGA or other agencies to know in advance what information is both
relevant and necessary for it to complete an identity comparison
between individuals and a known or suspected terrorist. In addition,
because NGA and other agencies may not always know what information
about an encounter with a known or suspected terrorist will be relevant
to law enforcement for the purpose of conducting an operational
response.
(E) From subsection (e)(2) because application of this provision
could present a serious impediment to counterterrorism, law
enforcement, or intelligence efforts in that it would put the subject
of an investigation, study or analysis on notice of that fact, thereby
permitting the subject to engage in conduct designed to frustrate or
impede that activity. The nature of counterterrorism, law enforcement,
or intelligence investigations is such that vital information about an
individual frequently can be obtained only from other persons who are
familiar with such individual and his/her activities. In such
investigations, it is not feasible to rely upon information furnished
by the individual concerning his own activities.
(F) From subsection (e)(3), to the extent that this subsection is
interpreted to require NGA to provide notice to an individual if NGA or
another agency receives or collects information about that individual
during an investigation or from a third party. Should the subsection be
so interpreted, exemption from this provision is necessary to avoid
impeding counterterrorism, law enforcement, or intelligence efforts by
putting the subject of an investigation, study or analysis on notice of
that fact, thereby permitting the subject to engage in conduct intended
to frustrate or impede that activity.
(G) From subsections (e)(4)(G) and (H) (Agency Requirements) and
(f) (Agency Rules), because this system is exempt from the access
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(d).
(H) From subsection (e)(5) because many of the records in this
system coming from other system of records are derived from other
agency record systems and therefore it is not possible for NGA to
ensure their compliance with this provision, however, NGA has
implemented internal quality assurance procedures to ensure that data
used in the matching process is as thorough, accurate, and current as
possible. In addition, in the collection of information for law
enforcement, counterterrorism, and intelligence purposes, it is
impossible to determine in advance what information is accurate,
relevant, timely, and complete. With the passage of time, seemingly
irrelevant or untimely information may acquire new significance as
further investigation brings new details to light. The restrictions
imposed by (e)(5) would limit the ability of those agencies' trained
investigators and intelligence analysts to exercise their judgment in
conducting investigations and impede the development of intelligence
necessary for effective law enforcement and counterterrorism efforts.
However, NGA has implemented internal quality assurance procedures to
ensure that the data used in the matching process is as thorough,
accurate, and current as possible.
(I) From subsection (e)(8) because to require individual notice of
disclosure of information due to compulsory legal process would pose an
impossible administrative burden on NGA and other agencies and could
alert the subjects of counterterrorism, law enforcement, or
intelligence investigations to the fact of those investigations when
not previously known.
(J) From subsection (f) (Agency Rules) because portions of this
system are exempt from the access and amendment provisions of
subsection (d).
(K) From subsection (g) to the extent that the system is exempt
from other specific subsections of the Privacy Act.
Dated: May 23, 2013.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2013-12741 Filed 5-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P