Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of Exemptions; Department of Homeland Security/National Protection and Programs Directorate-002 Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel Surety Program System of Records, 29072-29074 [2014-11433]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
29072
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
PART 179—CLAIMS COLLECTIONS
STANDARDS
1. The authority citation for part 179
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1103; Reorganization
Plan No. 2 of 1978; 5 U.S.C. 5514; 5 CFR part
550 subpart K; 31 U.S.C. 3701, 31 U.S.C.
3711; 31 U.S.C. 3716; 31 U.S.C. 3720A; 31
U.S.C. 3720B; 31 U.S.C. 3720C; 31 U.S.C.
3720D.
■
2. Add subpart D to read as follows:
Subpart D—Administrative Wage
Garnishment
Sec.
179.401
Administrative wage garnishment.
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 46; 31 U.S.C. 3720D;
31 CFR 285.11(f).
§ 179.401 Administrative wage
garnishment.
General. OPM may use administrative
wage garnishment to collect debts in
accordance with the requirements of 31
U.S.C. 3720D and 31 CFR 285.11,
including debts it refers to the Bureau
of the Fiscal Service, Department of the
Treasury, for cross-servicing pursuant to
31 U.S.C. 3711. This part adopts and
incorporates all of the provisions of 31
CFR 285.11 concerning administrative
wage garnishment, including the
hearing procedures described in 31 CFR
285.11(f). This section does not apply to
collection of debt by Federal salary
offset, under 5 U.S.C. 5514, the process
by which OPM collects debts from the
salaries of Federal employees.
[FR Doc. 2014–11624 Filed 5–20–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–23–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Office of the Secretary
6 CFR Part 5
[Docket No. DHS–2011–0033]
Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of
Exemptions; Department of Homeland
Security/National Protection and
Programs Directorate—002 Chemical
Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards
Personnel Surety Program System of
Records
Privacy Office, DHS.
Final rule.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of Homeland
Security is issuing a final rule to amend
its regulations to exempt portions of a
newly established system of records
titled, ‘‘Department of Homeland
Security/National Protection and
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 20, 2014
Jkt 232001
Programs Directorate—002 Chemical
Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards
Personnel Surety Program System of
Records’’ from certain provisions of the
Privacy Act. Specifically, the
Department exempts portions of the
‘‘Department of Homeland Security/
National Protection and Programs
Directorate—002 Chemical Facility
Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel
Surety Program 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 21, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
general questions please contact: Emily
Andrew (703) 235–2182, Senior Privacy
Officer, National Protection and
Programs Directorate, Department of
Homeland Security, Washington, DC
20528. For privacy issues please
contact: Karen L. Neuman (202) 343–
1717, Chief Privacy Officer, Privacy
Office, Department of Homeland
Security, Washington, DC 20528.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) National Protection and
Programs Directorate (NPPD) published
a notice of proposed rulemaking in the
Federal Register, 76 FR 34616, on June
14, 2011, 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/NPPD—002 Chemical Facility
Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel
Surety Program System of Records. The
DHS/NPPD—002 Chemical Facility
Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel
Surety Program system of records notice
(SORN) was published concurrently in
the Federal Register, 76 FR 34732, June
14, 2011, and comments were invited on
both the notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) and SORN.
Public Comments
DHS received three comments on the
NPRM and one comment on the SORN.
Comments on the NPRM and the SORN
are outlined below, followed by the
Department’s responses.
DHS also received a comment in the
public docket for the SORN (Document
DHS–2011–0032–0003), which
addressed the Chemical Facility AntiTerrorism Standards (CFATS) Personnel
Surety Program Information Collection
Request (Docket DHS–2009–0026) and
other aspects of the Personnel Surety
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Program, but did not address the SORN,
the NPRM, or privacy issues. DHS
reviewed that comment, and responded
to it in a Federal Register notice, 78 FR
17680, March 22, 2013.
NPRM
Comment: One commenter suggested
that the Department did not make ‘‘a
good faith effort to provide the public
with specific reasons or requirements’’
to justify Privacy Act exemptions. For
this reason the commenter opposed
DHS’s proposed exemptions.
Response: The Department believes
that it provided adequate justification to
support the Privacy Act exemptions
described in the NPRM. These
exemptions are needed to protect the
information (i.e., categories of records)
listed in the SORN from disclosure to
subjects or others related to the vetting
activities described in the SORN.
Specifically, the exemptions are
required to preclude subjects of the
CFATS Personnel Surety Program’s
vetting activities from frustrating these
vetting activities; to avoid disclosure of
vetting activity techniques; to protect
the identities and physical safety of
confidential informants and law
enforcement personnel; to ensure the
Department’s ability to obtain
information from third parties and other
sources; to protect the privacy of third
parties; to safeguard classified
information; to safeguard records; and
for other reasons discussed in the
NPRM. Disclosure of information about
persons vetted under the CFATS
Personnel Surety Program to those
persons could also permit them to avoid
detection or apprehension. The
exemptions proposed here are standard
law enforcement and national security
exemptions exercised by a large number
of Federal law enforcement and
intelligence agencies.
Comment: A commenter is pleased
that third-party individuals may be
designated to act on behalf of facilities
as ‘‘Submitters’’ under the CFATS
Personnel Surety Program, and seeks
clarification on how this will be
accomplished. Specifically, the
commenter sought clarification from
DHS on two points: (a) ‘‘any security or
information protection requirements
that may be required to serve as a
‘Submitter’ in light of the potential
Privacy Act exemption DHS currently
seeks and may receive’’; and (b) the
mechanics of ‘‘[h]ow, specifically,
authorized third parties will serve as a
facility’s agent for elements of TSDB
compliance[.]’’
Response: The Department does not
currently envision any additional or
new security or information protection
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
requirements that will apply to
Submitters in light of the Privacy Act
exemptions that are the subject of this
rulemaking. The Department will
publish a user manual when the CFATS
Personnel Surety Program is
implemented, discussing how different
users can access and use the Web portal
that the Department intends to establish
for the CFATS Personnel Surety
Program.
Comment: A commenter stated that
the Department’s proposal does
‘‘comply with the Privacy Act or follow
the corresponding lawful and
reasonable exemptions provided in this
case by the corresponding Department
of Homeland Security Appropriations
Act of 2007.’’ The commenter also
expressed concerns relating to: (a) The
length of time it will take the
government to conduct screening, and
the number of government entities
involved in screening; (b) the scope of
information being requested and the
resulting burden on high-risk chemical
facilities; and (c) the duplication
involved for those individuals who have
already been vetted against the Terrorist
Screening Database (TSDB) as part of
other government screening programs.
The commenter was in favor of the
proposed exemptions from portions of
the Privacy Act.
Response: The commenter’s concerns
about the screening procedure, the
scope of information requested, and
duplicative screening efforts and
recommendations are outside the scope
of the SORN and this Privacy Act
exemptions rulemaking. Nevertheless,
the Department addressed the
commenter’s other concerns in a
Federal Register notice that solicited
comments about the CFATS Personnel
Surety Program Information Collection
Request, 78 FR 17680, March 22, 2013.
SORN
Comment: One commenter asked
whether or not individuals with
national security clearances, individuals
with access to restricted areas under the
U.S. Army’s Chemical Personnel
Reliability Program (CPRP), or
individuals processed by ‘‘the DHS
suitability program’’ could be exempted
from the TSDB vetting requirements of
the Personnel Surety Program.
Response: Whether an individual (or
category of individuals) could be
exempted from the CFATS Personnel
Surety Program is not within the scope
of the SORN or this Privacy Act
exemptions rulemaking. DHS’s
responses to comments in this
document are limited to addressing the
SORN for the Personnel Surety Program,
and to Privacy Act exemptions related
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 20, 2014
Jkt 232001
to the collection and disclosure of
information under the Personnel Surety
Program Systems of Records.
After considering public comments,
the Department 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, Chapter I of Title 6, Code of
Federal Regulations, is amended as
follows:
PART 5—DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS
AND INFORMATION
1. The authority citation for part 5
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; Pub. L.
107–296, 116 Stat. 2135; 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, the following new paragraph
‘‘73’’:
■
Appendix C to Part 5—DHS Systems of
Records Exempt From the Privacy Act
*
*
*
*
*
73. The DHS/NPPD—002 Chemical Facility
Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel Surety
Program System of Records consists of
electronic and paper records and will be used
by DHS and its components. The DHS/
NPPD—002 Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism
Standards Personnel Surety Program System
of Records is a repository of information held
by DHS 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/
NPPD—002 Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism
Standards Personnel Surety Program System
of Records contains information that is
collected by, on behalf of, in support of, or
in cooperation with DHS and its components
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 limitations set forth therein:
5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1), (e)(4)(G),
(e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I); and (f). These exemptions
are made pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1) and
(k)(2).
In addition to records under the control of
DHS, the DHS/NPPD—002 Chemical Facility
Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel Surety
Program 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. DHS does not,
however, assert exemption from any
provisions of the Privacy Act with respect to
information submitted by high-risk chemical
facilities.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29073
To the extent the DHS/NPPD—002
Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards
Personnel Surety Program System of Records
contains records originating from other
systems of records, DHS will rely on the
exemptions claimed for those records in the
originating systems of records. Exemptions
from these particular subsections are
justified, on a case-by-case basis to be
determined at the time a request is made, for
the following reasons:
(a) From subsection (c)(3) (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 that 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 that 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 unreasonable administrative
burden by requiring investigations to be
continually 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 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
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
29074
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
themselves in the system would undermine
investigative efforts and reveal the identities
of witnesses, potential witnesses, and
confidential informants.
Dated: May 1, 2014.
Karen L. Neuman,
Chief Privacy Officer, Department of
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2014–11433 Filed 5–20–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–10–P
FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION
12 CFR Part 652
RIN 3052–AC83
Federal Agricultural Mortgage
Corporation Funding and Fiscal
Affairs; Farmer Mac Liquidity
Management
of the final rule is to strengthen
liquidity risk management at Farmer
Mac, improve the quality of assets in its
liquidity reserves, and bolster its ability
to fund its obligations and continue
operations during times of economic,
financial, or market adversity. In
accordance with 12 U.S.C. 2252, the
effective date of the final rule is 180
days after the date of publication in the
Federal Register, provided either or
both Houses of Congress are in session
for at least 30 calendar days after
publication of this regulation in the
Federal Register. Based on the records
of the sessions of Congress, the effective
date of the regulations is April 30, 2014.
(12 U.S.C. 2252(a)(9) and (10))
Dated: May 15, 2014.
Dale L. Aultman,
Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.
Farm Credit Administration.
Notice of effective date.
AGENCY:
[FR Doc. 2014–11663 Filed 5–20–14; 8:45 am]
ACTION:
BILLING CODE 6705–01–P
The Farm Credit
Administration (FCA, we or us) adopted
a final rule that amends its liquidity
management regulations for the Federal
Agricultural Mortgage Corporation
(Farmer Mac). The purpose of the final
rule is to strengthen liquidity risk
management at Farmer Mac, improve
the quality of assets in its liquidity
reserves, and bolster its ability to fund
its obligations and continue operations
during times of economic, financial, or
market adversity. In accordance with
the law, the effective date of the final
rule is 180 days after the date of
publication in the Federal Register,
provided either or both Houses of
Congress are in session for at least 30
calendar days after publication of this
regulation in the Federal Register.
DATES: Effective Date: Under the
authority of 12 U.S.C. 2252, the
regulation amending 12 CFR part 652
published on November 1, 2013 (78 FR
65541) is effective April 30, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joseph T. Connor, Associate Director for
Policy and Analysis, Office of
Secondary Market Oversight, Farm
Credit Administration, McLean, VA
22102–5090, (703) 883–4280, TTY
(703) 883–4056; or
Richard A. Katz, Senior Counsel, Office
of General Counsel, Farm Credit
Administration, McLean, Virginia
22102–5090, (703) 883–4020, TTY
(703) 883–4056.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Farm
Credit Administration (FCA, we or us)
adopted a final rule that amends its
liquidity management regulations for
the Federal Agricultural Mortgage
Corporation (Farmer Mac). The purpose
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 20, 2014
Jkt 232001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 73
[Docket No. FAA–2014–0272; Airspace
Docket No. 14–ASO–5]
RIN 2120–AA66
Amendment of Restricted Area R–
5304C; Camp Lejeune, NC
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; technical
amendment.
AGENCY:
This action changes the name
of the using agency for Restricted Area
R–5304C, Camp Lejeune, NC. This is an
administrative change to reflect
organizational restructuring within the
United States Marine Corps. It does not
affect the boundaries, designated
altitudes, time of designation or
activities conducted within the
restricted area.
DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, July
24, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Gallant, Airspace Policy and
Regulations Group, Office of Airspace
Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone: (202) 267–8783.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
The Rule
This action amends Title 14 Code of
Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 73 by
updating the using agency name for
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Restricted Area R–5304C, Camp
Lejeune, NC. The name change is due to
organizational restructuring within the
U.S. Marine Corps. This is an
administrative change that does not
affect the boundaries, designated
altitudes, or activities conducted within
the restricted area; therefore, notice and
public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)
are unnecessary.
The FAA has determined that this
action only involves an established
body of technical regulations for which
frequent and routine amendments are
necessary to keep them operationally
current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not
a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3)
does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated
impact is so minimal. Since this is a
routine matter that only affects air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when
promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
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 the 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 makes an administrative change to the
descriptions of Restricted Area R–
5303C, Camp Lejeune, NC to reflect
organizational realignments within the
U.S. Marine Corps.
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
311d. This airspace action is an
administrative change to the
descriptions of the affected restricted
area to update the using agency name.
It does not alter the dimensions,
altitudes, or times of designation of the
airspace; therefore, it is not expected to
cause any potentially significant
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 98 (Wednesday, May 21, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29072-29074]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11433]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Office of the Secretary
6 CFR Part 5
[Docket No. DHS-2011-0033]
Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of Exemptions; Department of
Homeland Security/National Protection and Programs Directorate--002
Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel Surety Program
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 newly established system
of records titled, ``Department of Homeland Security/National
Protection and Programs Directorate--002 Chemical Facility Anti-
Terrorism Standards Personnel Surety Program System of Records'' from
certain provisions of the Privacy Act. Specifically, the Department
exempts portions of the ``Department of Homeland Security/National
Protection and Programs Directorate--002 Chemical Facility Anti-
Terrorism Standards Personnel Surety Program 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 21, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general questions please contact:
Emily Andrew (703) 235-2182, Senior Privacy Officer, National
Protection and Programs Directorate, Department of Homeland Security,
Washington, DC 20528. For privacy issues please contact: Karen L.
Neuman (202) 343-1717, Chief Privacy Officer, Privacy Office,
Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) National Protection and
Programs Directorate (NPPD) published a notice of proposed rulemaking
in the Federal Register, 76 FR 34616, on June 14, 2011, 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/NPPD--002
Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel Surety Program
System of Records. The DHS/NPPD--002 Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism
Standards Personnel Surety Program system of records notice (SORN) was
published concurrently in the Federal Register, 76 FR 34732, June 14,
2011, and comments were invited on both the notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) and SORN.
Public Comments
DHS received three comments on the NPRM and one comment on the
SORN. Comments on the NPRM and the SORN are outlined below, followed by
the Department's responses.
DHS also received a comment in the public docket for the SORN
(Document DHS-2011-0032-0003), which addressed the Chemical Facility
Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) Personnel Surety Program Information
Collection Request (Docket DHS-2009-0026) and other aspects of the
Personnel Surety Program, but did not address the SORN, the NPRM, or
privacy issues. DHS reviewed that comment, and responded to it in a
Federal Register notice, 78 FR 17680, March 22, 2013.
NPRM
Comment: One commenter suggested that the Department did not make
``a good faith effort to provide the public with specific reasons or
requirements'' to justify Privacy Act exemptions. For this reason the
commenter opposed DHS's proposed exemptions.
Response: The Department believes that it provided adequate
justification to support the Privacy Act exemptions described in the
NPRM. These exemptions are needed to protect the information (i.e.,
categories of records) listed in the SORN from disclosure to subjects
or others related to the vetting activities described in the SORN.
Specifically, the exemptions are required to preclude subjects of the
CFATS Personnel Surety Program's vetting activities from frustrating
these vetting activities; to avoid disclosure of vetting activity
techniques; to protect the identities and physical safety of
confidential informants and law enforcement personnel; to ensure the
Department's ability to obtain information from third parties and other
sources; to protect the privacy of third parties; to safeguard
classified information; to safeguard records; and for other reasons
discussed in the NPRM. Disclosure of information about persons vetted
under the CFATS Personnel Surety Program to those persons could also
permit them to avoid detection or apprehension. The exemptions proposed
here are standard law enforcement and national security exemptions
exercised by a large number of Federal law enforcement and intelligence
agencies.
Comment: A commenter is pleased that third-party individuals may be
designated to act on behalf of facilities as ``Submitters'' under the
CFATS Personnel Surety Program, and seeks clarification on how this
will be accomplished. Specifically, the commenter sought clarification
from DHS on two points: (a) ``any security or information protection
requirements that may be required to serve as a `Submitter' in light of
the potential Privacy Act exemption DHS currently seeks and may
receive''; and (b) the mechanics of ``[h]ow, specifically, authorized
third parties will serve as a facility's agent for elements of TSDB
compliance[.]''
Response: The Department does not currently envision any additional
or new security or information protection
[[Page 29073]]
requirements that will apply to Submitters in light of the Privacy Act
exemptions that are the subject of this rulemaking. The Department will
publish a user manual when the CFATS Personnel Surety Program is
implemented, discussing how different users can access and use the Web
portal that the Department intends to establish for the CFATS Personnel
Surety Program.
Comment: A commenter stated that the Department's proposal does
``comply with the Privacy Act or follow the corresponding lawful and
reasonable exemptions provided in this case by the corresponding
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2007.'' The
commenter also expressed concerns relating to: (a) The length of time
it will take the government to conduct screening, and the number of
government entities involved in screening; (b) the scope of information
being requested and the resulting burden on high-risk chemical
facilities; and (c) the duplication involved for those individuals who
have already been vetted against the Terrorist Screening Database
(TSDB) as part of other government screening programs. The commenter
was in favor of the proposed exemptions from portions of the Privacy
Act.
Response: The commenter's concerns about the screening procedure,
the scope of information requested, and duplicative screening efforts
and recommendations are outside the scope of the SORN and this Privacy
Act exemptions rulemaking. Nevertheless, the Department addressed the
commenter's other concerns in a Federal Register notice that solicited
comments about the CFATS Personnel Surety Program Information
Collection Request, 78 FR 17680, March 22, 2013.
SORN
Comment: One commenter asked whether or not individuals with
national security clearances, individuals with access to restricted
areas under the U.S. Army's Chemical Personnel Reliability Program
(CPRP), or individuals processed by ``the DHS suitability program''
could be exempted from the TSDB vetting requirements of the Personnel
Surety Program.
Response: Whether an individual (or category of individuals) could
be exempted from the CFATS Personnel Surety Program is not within the
scope of the SORN or this Privacy Act exemptions rulemaking. DHS's
responses to comments in this document are limited to addressing the
SORN for the Personnel Surety Program, and to Privacy Act exemptions
related to the collection and disclosure of information under the
Personnel Surety Program Systems of Records.
After considering public comments, the Department 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, Chapter I of Title 6, Code
of Federal Regulations, is amended as follows:
PART 5--DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS AND INFORMATION
0
1. The authority citation for part 5 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; Pub. L. 107-296, 116 Stat.
2135; 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, the following new paragraph
``73'':
Appendix C to Part 5--DHS Systems of Records Exempt From the Privacy
Act
* * * * *
73. The DHS/NPPD--002 Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards
Personnel Surety Program System of Records consists of electronic
and paper records and will be used by DHS and its components. The
DHS/NPPD--002 Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel
Surety Program System of Records is a repository of information held
by DHS 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/NPPD--002 Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel
Surety Program System of Records contains information that is
collected by, on behalf of, in support of, or in cooperation with
DHS and its components 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 limitations set forth
therein: 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H),
(e)(4)(I); and (f). These exemptions are made pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552a(k)(1) and (k)(2).
In addition to records under the control of DHS, the DHS/NPPD--
002 Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel Surety
Program 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. DHS does not, however, assert exemption from any provisions of
the Privacy Act with respect to information submitted by high-risk
chemical facilities.
To the extent the DHS/NPPD--002 Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism
Standards Personnel Surety Program System of Records contains
records originating from other systems of records, DHS will rely on
the exemptions claimed for those records in the originating systems
of records. Exemptions from these particular subsections are
justified, on a case-by-case basis to be determined at the time a
request is made, for the following reasons:
(a) From subsection (c)(3) (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 that 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 that
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
unreasonable administrative burden by requiring investigations to be
continually 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 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
[[Page 29074]]
themselves in the system would undermine investigative efforts and
reveal the identities of witnesses, potential witnesses, and
confidential informants.
Dated: May 1, 2014.
Karen L. Neuman,
Chief Privacy Officer, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2014-11433 Filed 5-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
