Privacy Act; Implementation, 64506-64507 [2014-25819]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
64506
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 210 / Thursday, October 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify this AD:
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under
the DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26,
1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation
in Alaska to the extent that it justifies
making a regulatory distinction, and
(4) Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
occurs first, remove from the engine any EEC
software standard earlier than software
standard MB6.15.
(2) Install EEC software eligible for
installation.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
(f) Installation Prohibition
32 CFR Part 311
After the effective date of this AD, do not
install any EEC containing a software
standard earlier than software standard of
MB6.15, into any engine.
Privacy Act; Implementation
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
(h) Related Information
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Kenneth Steeves, Aerospace
Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA,
Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; phone: 781–238–7765; fax: 781–238–
7199; email: kenneth.steeves@faa.gov.
(2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation
Safety Agency AD 2014–0192, dated
September 1, 2014, for more information.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD
docket on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating it in Docket No. FAA–2014–0705.
(3) RR Alert Service Bulletin No. TRENT
1000 73–AH914, dated July 23, 2014, which
is not incorporated by reference in this AD,
can be obtained from RR using the contact
information in paragraph (h)(4) of this AD.
(4) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Rolls-Royce plc, Corporate
Communications, P.O. Box 31, Derby,
England, DE248BJ; phone: 011–44–1332–
242424; fax: 011–44–1332–249936; email:
https://www.rolls-royce.com/contact/civil_
team.jsp; Internet: https://
www.aeromanager.com.
(5) You may view this service information
at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate,
12 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as
follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
■
2014–22–02 Rolls-Royce plc: Amendment
39–18006; Docket No. FAA–2014–0705;
Directorate Identifier 2014–NE–13–AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective November 14, 2014.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to all Rolls-Royce plc (RR)
Trent 1000–A, 1000–C, 1000–D, 1000–E,
1000–G, and 1000–H turbofan engines.
(d) Reason
This AD was prompted by a finding that
an intermediate pressure (IP) shaft failure
may not be detected by engine electronic
controller (EEC) software earlier than
standard MB6.15. We are issuing this AD to
detect IP shaft failure and prevent IP
compressor turbine burst, uncontained
engine failure, and damage to the airplane.
(e) Actions and Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(1) Within 30 days or 180 flight cycles after
the effective date of this AD, whichever
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Oct 29, 2014
Jkt 235001
(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
The Manager, Engine Certification Office,
FAA, may approve AMOCs to this AD. Use
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to
make your request. You may email your
request to: ANE-AD-AMOC@faa.gov.
(i) Material Incorporated by Reference
None.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on
October 17, 2014.
Colleen M. D’Alessandro,
Assistant Directorate Manager, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014–25739 Filed 10–29–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Office of the Secretary
[Docket ID: DoD–2014–OS–0091]
Office of the Secretary, DoD.
Direct final rule with request for
comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Office of the Secretary of
Defense is exempting those records
contained in DWHS E05, entitled
‘‘Mandatory Declassification Review
Files,’’ pertaining to requests and/or
appeals from individuals for the
mandatory review of classified
documents. The exemption will allow
DoD to provide protection against
releasing any documents that remain
properly classified and not available for
release.
DATES: The rule is effective on January
8, 2015 unless adverse comments are
received by December 29, 2014. If
adverse comment is received, the
Department of Defense 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,
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.
SUMMARY:
Ms.
Cindy Allard at (571) 372–0461.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
direct final rule makes nonsubstantive
changes to the Office of the Secretary
Privacy Program rules. These changes
will allow the Department to add an
exemption rule to the Office of the
Secretary of Defense Privacy Program
rules that will exempt applicable
Department records and/or material
from certain portions of the Privacy Act.
This is being published as a direct final
rule as the Department of Defense does
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\30OCR1.SGM
30OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 210 / Thursday, October 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork
Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
not expect to receive any adverse
comments, and so a proposed rule is
unnecessary.
Direct Final Rule and Significant
Adverse Comments
DoD has determined this rulemaking
meets the criteria for a direct final rule
because it involves nonsubstantive
changes dealing with DoD’s
management of its Privacy Progams.
DoD expects no opposition to the
changes and no significant adverse
comments. However, if DoD receives a
significant adverse comment, the
Department will withdraw this direct
final rule by publishing a notice in the
Federal Register. A significant adverse
comment is one that explains: (1) Why
the direct final rule is inappropriate,
including challenges to the rule’s
underlying premise or approach; or (2)
why the direct final rule will be
ineffective or unacceptable without a
change. In determining whether a
comment necessitates withdrawal of
this direct final rule, DoD will consider
whether it warrants a substantive
response in a notice and comment
process.
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ and Executive
Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation
and Regulatory Review’’
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
It has been certified that this rule does
not have a 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.
Jkt 235001
It has been determined that this rule
does not involve a Federal mandate that
may result in the expenditure by State,
local and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100 million or more and that it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments.
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’
It has been determined that this rule
does not have federalism implications.
This rule does not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the National
Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, no
Federalism assessment is required.
Privacy.
Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory
Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6)
16:53 Oct 29, 2014
Section 202, Public Law 104–4,
‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 311
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
It has been determined that this rule
does not impose additional information
collection requirements on the public
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 311 is
amended as follows:
PART 311—OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AND JOINT
STAFF PRIVACY PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR
part 311 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 522a.
2. Section 311.8 is amended by adding
paragraph (c)(21) to read as follows:
■
§ 311.8
Procedures for exemptions.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(21) System identifier and name:
DWHS E05, Mandatory Declassification
Review Files.
(i) Exemption: Information classified
under E.O. 13526, as implemented by
DoD 5200.1–R, may be exempt pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1).
(ii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1).
(iii) Reasons: From subsection 5
U.S.C. 552a(d) because granting access
to information that is properly classified
pursuant to E.O. 13526, as implemented
by DoD 5200.1–R, may cause damage to
the national security.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
64507
Dated: October 27, 2014.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2014–25819 Filed 10–29–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 311
[Docket ID: DoD–2014–OS–0126]
Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation
Office of the Secretary, DoD.
Direct final rule with request for
comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Office of the Secretary of
Defense is exempting those records
contained in DPFPA 05, entitled
‘‘Computer Aided Dispatch and Records
Management System (CAD/RMS),’’
pertaining to investigatory material
compiled for law enforcement purposes
(under (j)(2) of the Act) to enable OSD
to conduct certain investigations and
relay law enforcement information
without compromise of the information,
and protect investigative techniques and
efforts employed, as well as
investigatory material compiled for law
enforcement purposes (under (k)(2) of
the Act), other than material within the
scope of subsection (k)(2) of the Privacy
Act to enable the protection of identities
of confidential sources who might not
otherwise come forward and who
furnished information under an express
promise that the sources’ identity would
be held in confidence. The exemption
will allow DoD to provide protection
against notification of investigatory
material including certain reciprocal
investigations which might alert a
subject to the fact that an investigation
of that individual is taking place, and
the disclosure of which would weaken
the on-going investigation, reveal
investigatory techniques, and place
confidential informants in jeopardy who
furnished information under an express
promise that the sources’ identity would
be held in confidence. Further,
requiring OSD to grant access to records
and amend these records would unfairly
impede the investigation of allegations
of unlawful activities. To require OSD to
confirm or deny the existence of a
record pertaining to a requesting
individual may in itself provide an
answer to that individual relating to an
on-going investigation. The
investigation of possible unlawful
activities would be jeopardized by
agency rules requiring verification of
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\30OCR1.SGM
30OCR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 210 (Thursday, October 30, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64506-64507]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25819]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
[Docket ID: DoD-2014-OS-0091]
32 CFR Part 311
Privacy Act; Implementation
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DoD.
ACTION: Direct final rule with request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of the Secretary of Defense is exempting those
records contained in DWHS E05, entitled ``Mandatory Declassification
Review Files,'' pertaining to requests and/or appeals from individuals
for the mandatory review of classified documents. The exemption will
allow DoD to provide protection against releasing any documents that
remain properly classified and not available for release.
DATES: The rule is effective on January 8, 2015 unless adverse comments
are received by December 29, 2014. If adverse comment is received, the
Department of Defense 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, 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: Ms. Cindy Allard at (571) 372-0461.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This direct final rule makes nonsubstantive
changes to the Office of the Secretary Privacy Program rules. These
changes will allow the Department to add an exemption rule to the
Office of the Secretary of Defense Privacy Program rules that will
exempt applicable Department records and/or material from certain
portions of the Privacy Act. This is being published as a direct final
rule as the Department of Defense does
[[Page 64507]]
not expect to receive any adverse comments, and so a proposed rule is
unnecessary.
Direct Final Rule and Significant Adverse Comments
DoD has determined this rulemaking meets the criteria for a direct
final rule because it involves nonsubstantive changes dealing with
DoD's management of its Privacy Progams. DoD expects no opposition to
the changes and no significant adverse comments. However, if DoD
receives a significant adverse comment, the Department will withdraw
this direct final rule by publishing a notice in the Federal Register.
A significant adverse comment is one that explains: (1) Why the direct
final rule is inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's
underlying premise or approach; or (2) why the direct final rule will
be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. In determining whether
a comment necessitates withdrawal of this direct final rule, DoD will
consider whether it warrants a substantive response in a notice and
comment process.
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' and Executive
Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review''
It has been determined that 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)
It has been certified that this rule does not have a 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)
It has been determined that this rule does not impose additional
information collection requirements on the public under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Section 202, Public Law 104-4, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act''
It has been determined that this rule does not involve a Federal
mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more and that it will not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments.
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism''
It has been determined that this rule does not have federalism
implications. This rule does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the National Government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Therefore, no Federalism assessment is
required.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 311
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 311 is amended as follows:
PART 311--OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AND JOINT STAFF
PRIVACY PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 311 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 522a.
0
2. Section 311.8 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(21) to read as
follows:
Sec. 311.8 Procedures for exemptions.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(21) System identifier and name: DWHS E05, Mandatory
Declassification Review Files.
(i) Exemption: Information classified under E.O. 13526, as
implemented by DoD 5200.1-R, may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552a(k)(1).
(ii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1).
(iii) Reasons: From subsection 5 U.S.C. 552a(d) because granting
access to information that is properly classified pursuant to E.O.
13526, as implemented by DoD 5200.1-R, may cause damage to the national
security.
Dated: October 27, 2014.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2014-25819 Filed 10-29-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
