Privacy Act; Implementation, 39186-39188 [2013-15596]
Download as PDF
39186
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
21 CFR Part 21
Office of the Secretary
Privacy.
45 CFR Part 5b
45 CFR Part 5b
Privacy.
Therefore, the Department of Health
and Human Services is amending 21
CFR part 21 and 45 CFR part 5b to read
as follows:
[Docket No. NIH–2011–0001]
Title 21
PART 21—PROTECTION OF PRIVACY
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 21 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 371; 5 U.S.C. 552,
552a.
2. Section 21.61 is amended by adding
paragraph (d) to read as follows:
■
§ 21.61
Exempt systems.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Records in the following Food and
Drug Administration Privacy Act
Records Systems are exempt under 5
U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) and (k)(5) from the
provisions enumerated in paragraph
(a)(1) through paragraph (a)(3) of this
section: FDA Records Related to
Research Misconduct Proceedings,
HHS/FDA/OC, 09–10–0020.
Title 45
PART 5b—PRIVACY ACT
REGULATIONS
3. The authority citation for 45 CFR
part 5b continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 5 U.S.C. 552a.
4. Section 5b.11 is amended by adding
paragraph (b)(2)(vii)(C) to read as
follows:
■
§ 5b.11
Exempt systems.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(vii) * * *
(C) FDA Records Related to Research
Misconduct Proceedings, HHS/FDA/OC,
09–10–0020.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: June 14, 2013.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary of Health and Human Services.
[FR Doc. 2013–15599 Filed 6–28–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:40 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Privacy Act; Implementation
ACTION:
Final rule.
The Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS or Department),
through the National Institutes of Health
(NIH), is exempting a system of records
from certain requirements of the Privacy
Act to protect the integrity of NIH
research misconduct proceedings and to
protect the identity of confidential
sources in such proceedings.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective July 31, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry
Moore, NIH Regulations Officer, Office
of Management Assessment, Division of
Management Support, 6011 Executive
Boulevard, Suite 601, MSC 7669,
Rockville, MD 20852–7669; telephone
301–496–4607; fax 301–402–0169; email
jm40z@nih.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: HHS/NIH
is exempting a system of records, 09–
25–0223, ‘‘NIH Records Related to
Research Misconduct Proceedings,
HHS/NIH,’’ under subsections (k)(2) and
(k)(5) of the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a)
from notification, access, accounting,
and amendment provisions of the
Privacy Act.
This system of records is part of NIH’s
implementation of its responsibilities
under the Public Health Service (PHS)
Policies on Research Misconduct, 42
CFR Part 93, and applies to alleged or
actual research misconduct involving
research in the NIH Intramural Research
Program (IRP): (1) Carried out in NIH
facilities by any person; (2) funded by
the NIH IRP in any location; or (3)
undertaken by an NIH employee or
trainee as part of his or her official NIH
duties or NIH training activities,
regardless of location. Subject to NIH
IRP policy, a person who, at the time of
the alleged or actual research
misconduct, was employed by, was an
agent of, or was affiliated by contract,
agreement, or other arrangement with
NIH is covered by the system.
The term ‘‘research misconduct’’ is
defined at 42 CFR 93.103 to mean
‘‘fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism
in proposing, performing, or reviewing
research, or in reporting research
results.’’ The general policy of the PHS
Policies on Research Misconduct is that
‘‘[r]esearch misconduct involving PHS
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
support is contrary to the interests of the
PHS and the Federal government and to
the health and safety of the public, to
the integrity of research, and to the
conservation of public funds’’ 42 CFR
93.100(a).
Under the Privacy Act, individuals
have a right of access to information
pertaining to them that is contained in
a system of records. At the same time,
the Privacy Act permits certain types of
systems to be exempt from some of the
Privacy Act requirements. For example,
section (k)(2) of the Privacy Act allows
Agency heads to exempt from certain
Privacy Act provisions a system of
records containing investigatory
material compiled for law enforcement
purposes. This exemption’s effect on the
record access provision is qualified in
that if the maintenance of the material
results in the denial of any right,
privilege, or benefit that the individual
would otherwise be entitled to by
federal law, the individual must be
granted access to the material except to
the extent that the access would reveal
the identity of a source who furnished
information to the government under an
express promise that the identity of the
source would be held in confidence. In
addition, section (k)(5) of the Privacy
Act permits an Agency to exempt
investigatory material from certain
Privacy Act provisions where such
material is compiled solely for the
purpose of determining suitability,
eligibility, or qualifications for federal
civilian employment, military service,
federal contracts, or access to classified
information. This exemption is also
limited as it will be applied only to the
extent that the disclosure of such
material would reveal the identity of a
source who furnished information to the
government under an express promise
of confidentiality.
The NIH may take administrative
action in response to a research
misconduct proceeding and, where
there is a reasonable indication that a
civil or criminal fraud may have taken
place, will refer the matter to the
appropriate investigative body. As such,
the NIH’s records related to research
misconduct proceedings are compiled
for law enforcement purposes, and the
subsection (k)(2) exemption is
applicable to this system of records.
Moreover, where records related to
research misconduct proceedings are
compiled solely for the purpose of
making determinations as to the
suitability for appointment as special
government employees or eligibility for
federal contracts from PHS agencies, the
subsection (k)(5) exemption is
applicable.
E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM
01JYR1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
On August 28, 2012, HHS/NIH
published a System of Records Notice
(SORN) for this system (77 FR 52043).
On the same date, HHS/NIH also
published a proposed rule (77 FR
51954) and, anticipating no significant
adverse comment, a direct final rule (77
FR 51933) to exempt this system of
records under subsections (k)(2) and
(k)(5) of the Privacy Act from the
notification, access, accounting, and
amendment provisions of the Privacy
Act. The comment period was open
through November 13, 2012. The
Agency received two comments during
the rulemaking comment period. One
comment, which questioned the privacy
interest of scientists who receive grant
money and are accused of misconduct,
appears to have misunderstood the
scope and applicability of the
exceptions. The system of records in
question pertains to research
misconduct proceedings involving the
NIH IRP. Thus, NIH grant funding to
extramural scientists is unlikely to be
involved. Moreover, the exception
would not interfere with the public
disclosure of findings of research
misconduct by HHS’ Office of Research
Integrity (ORI) on behalf of the agency,
including findings that may involve NIH
IRP scientists or trainees found to have
committed research misconduct. The
other comment expressed a general
concern about a loss of privacy and
appeared to seek a reconsideration of
the agency’s approach, which was
construed as sufficiently adverse to
merit withdrawal of the direct final rule
on January 10, 2013. HHS/NIH now
publishes this final rule under the
standard notice and comment
rulemaking process.
After considering the comments,
HHS/NIH believes the exemptions at
issue are necessary to fulfill the
Agency’s responsibilities for addressing
research misconduct. The exemptions
are essential for NIH to protect the
confidentiality of sources who provide
information relevant to a research
misconduct proceeding and to guard
against the premature disclosure of
research misconduct records that might
obstruct or compromise proceedings.
The exemptions will thereby enable the
NIH to maintain the integrity and
effectiveness of research misconduct
proceedings.
Failure to adopt the exemptions
would jeopardize the integrity and
effectiveness of the NIH’s research
misconduct proceedings. The NIH’s new
system of records is modeled after the
system of records maintained by the
ORI, entitled ‘‘HHS Records Related to
Research Misconduct Proceedings,
HHS/OS/ORI’’ System No. 09–37–0021
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:40 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
(59 FR 36717, July 19, 1994; revised
most recently at 74 FR 44847, August
31, 2009). The ORI has exempted these
records under subsections (k)(2) and
(k)(5) of the Privacy Act from the
notification, access, accounting, and
amendment provisions of the Privacy
Act to ensure that these records will not
be disclosed inappropriately (59 FR
36717, July 19, 1994). Likewise, HHS/
NIH believes that exempting the new
NIH system from the same Privacy Act
provisions is essential to ensure that
material in the NIH’s files related to
research misconduct proceedings is not
disclosed inappropriately.
Subject to its obligations under the
PHS Policies on Research Misconduct,
42 CFR Part 93, and other applicable
law, HHS/NIH is therefore exempting
this system under subsections (k)(2) and
(k)(5) of the Privacy Act from the
notification, access, and amendment
provisions of the Act (subsections (c)(3),
(d)(1) to (d)(4), (e)(4)(G) and (e)(4)(H),
and (f)). The specific rationales for
applying each of the exemptions are as
follows:
• Subsection (c)(3). An exemption
from the requirement to provide an
accounting of disclosures is needed
during the pendency of a research
misconduct proceeding. Release of an
accounting of disclosures to an
individual who is the subject of a
pending research misconduct
assessment, inquiry, or investigation
could prematurely reveal the nature and
scope of the assessment, inquiry, or
investigation and could result in the
altering or destruction of evidence,
improper influencing of witnesses, and
other evasive actions that could impede
or compromise the proceeding.
• Subsection (d)(1). An exemption
from the access requirement is needed
both during and after a research
misconduct proceeding to avoid
revealing the identity of any source who
was expressly promised confidentiality.
Only material that would reveal a
confidential source will be exempt from
access. Protecting the identity of a
source is necessary when the source is
unwilling to report possible research
misconduct because of fear of retaliation
(e.g., from an employer or coworkers).
• Subsections (d)(2) through (d)(4).
An exemption from the amendment
provisions is necessary while one or
more related research misconduct
proceedings is pending. Allowing
amendment of investigative records in a
pending proceeding could interfere with
that proceeding. Even after that
proceeding is concluded, an amendment
could interfere with other pending or
prospective research misconduct
proceedings or could significantly delay
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
39187
inquiries or investigations in an attempt
to resolve questions of accuracy,
relevance, timeliness, and
completeness.
• Subsection (e)(4)(G) and (e)(4)(H).
An exemption from the Privacy Act
notification provisions is necessary
during the pendency of a research
misconduct proceeding because
notifying an individual who is the
subject of an assessment, inquiry, or
investigation of the fact of such
proceedings could prematurely reveal
the nature and scope of the proceedings
and result in the altering or destruction
of evidence, improper influencing of
witnesses, and other evasive actions that
could impede or compromise the
proceeding. This exemption does not
alter NIH’s obligations to provide notice
to the respondent in a research
misconduct proceeding as described in
the PHS Policies on Research
Misconduct, 42 CFR Part 93.
• Subsection (f). An exemption from
the requirement to establish procedures
for notification, access to records,
amendment of records, or appeals of
denials of access to records is
appropriate because the procedures
would serve no purpose in light of the
other exemptions, to the extent that
those exemptions apply.
To avoid the unnecessary application
of the exemptions, the NIH will give
case-by-case consideration to requests
for notification, access, and amendment
submitted to the NIH Agency Intramural
Research Integrity Officer (System
Manager) or NIH Privacy Act Officer.
Except for information that would
reveal the identity of a source who was
expressly promised confidentiality, the
access exemption will not prohibit
HHS/NIH from granting respondents’
access requests consistent with the PHS
Policies on Research Misconduct, 42
CFR part 93, including in those cases in
which a finding of research misconduct
has become final and an administrative
action has been imposed. The request
submission process is described in the
SORN previously published for this
system (77 FR 52043) and available
online at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/
FR-2012-08-28/pdf/2012-20884.pdf.
Analysis of Impacts
HHS/NIH has examined the impacts
of the final rule under Executive Order
12866, Executive Order 13563, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601–612), and the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4).
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct Agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, when regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM
01JYR1
39188
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity). The Agency
believes that this final rule is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
requires Agencies to analyze regulatory
options that would minimize any
significant impact of a rule on small
entities. Because the final rule imposes
no duties or obligations on small
entities, the Agency certifies that the
final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Section 202(a) of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires
that Agencies prepare a written
statement, which includes an
assessment of anticipated costs and
benefits, before proposing ‘‘any rule that
includes any Federal mandate that may
result in the expenditure by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100,000,000
or more (adjusted annually for inflation)
in any one year.’’ The current threshold
after adjustment for inflation is $136
million, using the most current (2010)
Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross
Domestic Product. HHS/NIH does not
expect this final rule to result in any
1-year expenditure that would meet or
exceed this amount.
List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 5b
Privacy.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the Department of Health and
Human Services is amending 45 CFR
part 5b Subtitle A to read as follows:
PART 5b—PRIVACY ACT
REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for 45 CFR
part 5b continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 5 U.S.C. 552a.
2. Section 5b.11 is amended by adding
paragraph (b)(2)(vii)(D) to read as
follows:
Exempt systems.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(vii) * * *
(D) NIH Records Related to Research
Misconduct Proceedings, HHS/NIH, 09–
25–0223.
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:40 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
[FR Doc. 2013–15596 Filed 6–28–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 100812345–2142–03]
RIN 0648–XC728
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of
Mexico, and South Atlantic; 2013
Commercial Accountability Measure
and Closure for South Atlantic Gray
Triggerfish
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; closure.
AGENCY:
NMFS implements
accountability measures (AMs) for
commercial gray triggerfish in the
exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the
South Atlantic. Commercial landings for
gray triggerfish, as estimated by the
Science and Research Director (SRD),
are projected to reach the commercial
annual catch limit (ACL) on July 7,
2013. Therefore, NMFS closes the
commercial sector for gray triggerfish in
the South Atlantic EEZ on July 7, 2013,
and it will remain closed until the start
of the next fishing season, January 1,
2014. This closure is necessary to
protect the gray triggerfish resource.
DATES: This rule is effective 12:01 a.m.,
local time, July 7, 2013, until 12:01 a.m.,
local time, January 1, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Catherine Hayslip, telephone: 727–824–
5305, email:
Catherine.Hayslip@noaa.gov.
SUMMARY:
The
snapper-grouper fishery of the South
Atlantic includes gray triggerfish and is
managed under the Fishery
Management Plan for the SnapperGrouper Fishery of the South Atlantic
Region (FMP). The FMP was prepared
by the South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council and is
implemented under the authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act by
regulations at 50 CFR part 622.
The commercial ACL for gray
triggerfish in the South Atlantic is
305,262 lb (138,465 kg), round weight,
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
■
§ 5b.11
Dated: June 14, 2013.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary of Health and Human Services.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
for the current fishing year, January 1
through December 31, 2013, as specified
in 50 CFR 622.193(q)(1)(i).
Under 50 CFR 622.193(q)(1), NMFS is
required to close the commercial sector
for gray triggerfish when the commercial
ACL is reached, or is projected to be
reached, by filing a notification to that
effect with the Office of the Federal
Register. NMFS has determined that the
commercial ACL for South Atlantic gray
triggerfish will have been reached by
July 7, 2013. Accordingly, the
commercial sector for South Atlantic
gray triggerfish is closed effective 12:01
a.m., local time, July 7, 2013, until 12:01
a.m., local time, January 1, 2014.
The operator of a vessel with a valid
commercial vessel permit for South
Atlantic snapper-grouper having gray
triggerfish onboard must have landed
and bartered, traded, or sold such gray
triggerfish prior to 12:01 a.m., local
time, July 7, 2013. During the closure,
the bag limit specified in 50 CFR
622.187(b)(8), applies to all harvest or
possession of gray triggerfish in or from
the South Atlantic EEZ. During the
closure, the possession limits specified
in 50 CFR 622.187(c), apply to all
harvest or possession of gray triggerfish
in or from the South Atlantic EEZ.
During the closure, the sale or purchase
of gray triggerfish taken from the EEZ is
prohibited. The prohibition on sale or
purchase does not apply to the sale or
purchase of gray triggerfish that were
harvested, landed ashore, and sold prior
to 12:01 a.m., local time, July 7, 2013,
and were held in cold storage by a
dealer or processor.
For a person on board a vessel for
which a Federal commercial or charter
vessel/headboat permit for the South
Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery has
been issued, the bag and possession
limit provisions of the commercial
closure for gray triggerfish would apply
regardless of whether the fish are
harvested in state or Federal waters, as
specified in 50 CFR 622.193(q)(1)(i).
Classification
The Regional Administrator,
Southeast Region, NMFS, has
determined this temporary rule is
necessary for the conservation and
management of gray triggerfish and the
South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery
and is consistent with the MagnusonStevens Act, the FMP, and other
applicable laws.
This action is taken under 50 CFR
622.193(q)(1) and is exempt from review
under Executive Order 12866.
These measures are exempt from the
procedures of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act because the temporary rule is issued
E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM
01JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 126 (Monday, July 1, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39186-39188]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15596]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Office of the Secretary
45 CFR Part 5b
[Docket No. NIH-2011-0001]
Privacy Act; Implementation
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS or
Department), through the National Institutes of Health (NIH), is
exempting a system of records from certain requirements of the Privacy
Act to protect the integrity of NIH research misconduct proceedings and
to protect the identity of confidential sources in such proceedings.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective July 31, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry Moore, NIH Regulations Officer,
Office of Management Assessment, Division of Management Support, 6011
Executive Boulevard, Suite 601, MSC 7669, Rockville, MD 20852-7669;
telephone 301-496-4607; fax 301-402-0169; email jm40z@nih.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: HHS/NIH is exempting a system of records,
09-25-0223, ``NIH Records Related to Research Misconduct Proceedings,
HHS/NIH,'' under subsections (k)(2) and (k)(5) of the Privacy Act (5
U.S.C. 552a) from notification, access, accounting, and amendment
provisions of the Privacy Act.
This system of records is part of NIH's implementation of its
responsibilities under the Public Health Service (PHS) Policies on
Research Misconduct, 42 CFR Part 93, and applies to alleged or actual
research misconduct involving research in the NIH Intramural Research
Program (IRP): (1) Carried out in NIH facilities by any person; (2)
funded by the NIH IRP in any location; or (3) undertaken by an NIH
employee or trainee as part of his or her official NIH duties or NIH
training activities, regardless of location. Subject to NIH IRP policy,
a person who, at the time of the alleged or actual research misconduct,
was employed by, was an agent of, or was affiliated by contract,
agreement, or other arrangement with NIH is covered by the system.
The term ``research misconduct'' is defined at 42 CFR 93.103 to
mean ``fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing,
performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.''
The general policy of the PHS Policies on Research Misconduct is that
``[r]esearch misconduct involving PHS support is contrary to the
interests of the PHS and the Federal government and to the health and
safety of the public, to the integrity of research, and to the
conservation of public funds'' 42 CFR 93.100(a).
Under the Privacy Act, individuals have a right of access to
information pertaining to them that is contained in a system of
records. At the same time, the Privacy Act permits certain types of
systems to be exempt from some of the Privacy Act requirements. For
example, section (k)(2) of the Privacy Act allows Agency heads to
exempt from certain Privacy Act provisions a system of records
containing investigatory material compiled for law enforcement
purposes. This exemption's effect on the record access provision is
qualified in that if the maintenance of the material results in the
denial of any right, privilege, or benefit that the individual would
otherwise be entitled to by federal law, the individual must be granted
access to the material except to the extent that the access would
reveal the identity of a source who furnished information to the
government under an express promise that the identity of the source
would be held in confidence. In addition, section (k)(5) of the Privacy
Act permits an Agency to exempt investigatory material from certain
Privacy Act provisions where such material is compiled solely for the
purpose of determining suitability, eligibility, or qualifications for
federal civilian employment, military service, federal contracts, or
access to classified information. This exemption is also limited as it
will be applied only to the extent that the disclosure of such material
would reveal the identity of a source who furnished information to the
government under an express promise of confidentiality.
The NIH may take administrative action in response to a research
misconduct proceeding and, where there is a reasonable indication that
a civil or criminal fraud may have taken place, will refer the matter
to the appropriate investigative body. As such, the NIH's records
related to research misconduct proceedings are compiled for law
enforcement purposes, and the subsection (k)(2) exemption is applicable
to this system of records. Moreover, where records related to research
misconduct proceedings are compiled solely for the purpose of making
determinations as to the suitability for appointment as special
government employees or eligibility for federal contracts from PHS
agencies, the subsection (k)(5) exemption is applicable.
[[Page 39187]]
On August 28, 2012, HHS/NIH published a System of Records Notice
(SORN) for this system (77 FR 52043). On the same date, HHS/NIH also
published a proposed rule (77 FR 51954) and, anticipating no
significant adverse comment, a direct final rule (77 FR 51933) to
exempt this system of records under subsections (k)(2) and (k)(5) of
the Privacy Act from the notification, access, accounting, and
amendment provisions of the Privacy Act. The comment period was open
through November 13, 2012. The Agency received two comments during the
rulemaking comment period. One comment, which questioned the privacy
interest of scientists who receive grant money and are accused of
misconduct, appears to have misunderstood the scope and applicability
of the exceptions. The system of records in question pertains to
research misconduct proceedings involving the NIH IRP. Thus, NIH grant
funding to extramural scientists is unlikely to be involved. Moreover,
the exception would not interfere with the public disclosure of
findings of research misconduct by HHS' Office of Research Integrity
(ORI) on behalf of the agency, including findings that may involve NIH
IRP scientists or trainees found to have committed research misconduct.
The other comment expressed a general concern about a loss of privacy
and appeared to seek a reconsideration of the agency's approach, which
was construed as sufficiently adverse to merit withdrawal of the direct
final rule on January 10, 2013. HHS/NIH now publishes this final rule
under the standard notice and comment rulemaking process.
After considering the comments, HHS/NIH believes the exemptions at
issue are necessary to fulfill the Agency's responsibilities for
addressing research misconduct. The exemptions are essential for NIH to
protect the confidentiality of sources who provide information relevant
to a research misconduct proceeding and to guard against the premature
disclosure of research misconduct records that might obstruct or
compromise proceedings. The exemptions will thereby enable the NIH to
maintain the integrity and effectiveness of research misconduct
proceedings.
Failure to adopt the exemptions would jeopardize the integrity and
effectiveness of the NIH's research misconduct proceedings. The NIH's
new system of records is modeled after the system of records maintained
by the ORI, entitled ``HHS Records Related to Research Misconduct
Proceedings, HHS/OS/ORI'' System No. 09-37-0021 (59 FR 36717, July 19,
1994; revised most recently at 74 FR 44847, August 31, 2009). The ORI
has exempted these records under subsections (k)(2) and (k)(5) of the
Privacy Act from the notification, access, accounting, and amendment
provisions of the Privacy Act to ensure that these records will not be
disclosed inappropriately (59 FR 36717, July 19, 1994). Likewise, HHS/
NIH believes that exempting the new NIH system from the same Privacy
Act provisions is essential to ensure that material in the NIH's files
related to research misconduct proceedings is not disclosed
inappropriately.
Subject to its obligations under the PHS Policies on Research
Misconduct, 42 CFR Part 93, and other applicable law, HHS/NIH is
therefore exempting this system under subsections (k)(2) and (k)(5) of
the Privacy Act from the notification, access, and amendment provisions
of the Act (subsections (c)(3), (d)(1) to (d)(4), (e)(4)(G) and
(e)(4)(H), and (f)). The specific rationales for applying each of the
exemptions are as follows:
Subsection (c)(3). An exemption from the requirement to
provide an accounting of disclosures is needed during the pendency of a
research misconduct proceeding. Release of an accounting of disclosures
to an individual who is the subject of a pending research misconduct
assessment, inquiry, or investigation could prematurely reveal the
nature and scope of the assessment, inquiry, or investigation and could
result in the altering or destruction of evidence, improper influencing
of witnesses, and other evasive actions that could impede or compromise
the proceeding.
Subsection (d)(1). An exemption from the access
requirement is needed both during and after a research misconduct
proceeding to avoid revealing the identity of any source who was
expressly promised confidentiality. Only material that would reveal a
confidential source will be exempt from access. Protecting the identity
of a source is necessary when the source is unwilling to report
possible research misconduct because of fear of retaliation (e.g., from
an employer or coworkers).
Subsections (d)(2) through (d)(4). An exemption from the
amendment provisions is necessary while one or more related research
misconduct proceedings is pending. Allowing amendment of investigative
records in a pending proceeding could interfere with that proceeding.
Even after that proceeding is concluded, an amendment could interfere
with other pending or prospective research misconduct proceedings or
could significantly delay inquiries or investigations in an attempt to
resolve questions of accuracy, relevance, timeliness, and completeness.
Subsection (e)(4)(G) and (e)(4)(H). An exemption from the
Privacy Act notification provisions is necessary during the pendency of
a research misconduct proceeding because notifying an individual who is
the subject of an assessment, inquiry, or investigation of the fact of
such proceedings could prematurely reveal the nature and scope of the
proceedings and result in the altering or destruction of evidence,
improper influencing of witnesses, and other evasive actions that could
impede or compromise the proceeding. This exemption does not alter
NIH's obligations to provide notice to the respondent in a research
misconduct proceeding as described in the PHS Policies on Research
Misconduct, 42 CFR Part 93.
Subsection (f). An exemption from the requirement to
establish procedures for notification, access to records, amendment of
records, or appeals of denials of access to records is appropriate
because the procedures would serve no purpose in light of the other
exemptions, to the extent that those exemptions apply.
To avoid the unnecessary application of the exemptions, the NIH
will give case-by-case consideration to requests for notification,
access, and amendment submitted to the NIH Agency Intramural Research
Integrity Officer (System Manager) or NIH Privacy Act Officer. Except
for information that would reveal the identity of a source who was
expressly promised confidentiality, the access exemption will not
prohibit HHS/NIH from granting respondents' access requests consistent
with the PHS Policies on Research Misconduct, 42 CFR part 93, including
in those cases in which a finding of research misconduct has become
final and an administrative action has been imposed. The request
submission process is described in the SORN previously published for
this system (77 FR 52043) and available online at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-08-28/pdf/2012-20884.pdf.
Analysis of Impacts
HHS/NIH has examined the impacts of the final rule under Executive
Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601-612), and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104-4). Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct Agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory
[[Page 39188]]
approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages;
distributive impacts; and equity). The Agency believes that this final
rule is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order
12866.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires Agencies to analyze
regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule
on small entities. Because the final rule imposes no duties or
obligations on small entities, the Agency certifies that the final rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
Section 202(a) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires
that Agencies prepare a written statement, which includes an assessment
of anticipated costs and benefits, before proposing ``any rule that
includes any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year.'' The current threshold after adjustment
for inflation is $136 million, using the most current (2010) Implicit
Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. HHS/NIH does not expect
this final rule to result in any 1-year expenditure that would meet or
exceed this amount.
List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 5b
Privacy.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Department of Health
and Human Services is amending 45 CFR part 5b Subtitle A to read as
follows:
PART 5b--PRIVACY ACT REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for 45 CFR part 5b continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 5 U.S.C. 552a.
0
2. Section 5b.11 is amended by adding paragraph (b)(2)(vii)(D) to read
as follows:
Sec. 5b.11 Exempt systems.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(vii) * * *
(D) NIH Records Related to Research Misconduct Proceedings, HHS/
NIH, 09-25-0223.
* * * * *
Dated: June 14, 2013.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary of Health and Human Services.
[FR Doc. 2013-15596 Filed 6-28-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P