DoD Privacy Program, 4201-4211 [2015-01262]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 17 / Tuesday, January 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
that the proximate substation would be
owned by a different entity than the
generating plant. In addition, we
estimate that all generator owners and
transmission owners will initially
review plant and substation sites to
determine applicability with the
proposed standard.
48. On average, each small entity
affected may have a one-time cost of
$730 per site, representing a one-time
review of the program for each entity,
consisting of 10 man-hours at $73/hour
as explained above in the information
collection statement. We do not
consider this cost to be a significant
economic impact for small entities. The
Commission certifies that Reliability
Standard PRC–005–3 will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Accordingly, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required.
V. Environmental Analysis
49. The Commission is required to
prepare an Environmental Assessment
or an Environmental Impact Statement
for any action that may have a
significant adverse effect on the human
environment.51 The Commission has
categorically excluded certain actions
from this requirement as not having a
significant effect on the human
environment. Included in the exclusion
are rules that are clarifying, corrective,
or procedural or that do not
substantially change the effect of the
regulations being amended.52 The
actions taken herein fall within this
categorical exclusion in the
Commission’s regulations.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
VI. Document Availability
50. In addition to publishing the full
text of this document in the Federal
Register, the Commission provides all
interested persons an opportunity to
view and/or print the contents of this
document via the Internet through the
Commission’s Home Page (https://
www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission’s
Public Reference Room during normal
business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE.,
Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426.
51. From the Commission’s Home
Page on the Internet, this information is
available on eLibrary. The full text of
this document is available on eLibrary
in PDF and Microsoft Word format for
viewing, printing, and/or downloading.
To access this document in eLibrary,
type the docket number excluding the
51 Regulations Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Order No. 486,
FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,783 (1987).
52 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
last three digits of this document in the
docket number field.
52. User assistance is available for
eLibrary and the Commission’s Web site
during normal business hours from the
Commission’s Online Support at 202–
502–6652 (toll free at 1–866–208–3676)
or email at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov,
or the Public Reference Room at (202)
502–8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. Email
the Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
VII. Effective Date and Congressional
Notification
53. This Final Rule is effective March
30, 2015.
54. The Commission has determined,
with the concurrence of the
Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB, that this rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’
as defined in section 351 of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996.53 The Commission
will submit the Final Rule to both
houses of Congress and to the General
Accountability Office.
By direction of the Commission.
Commissioner Honorable is voting present.
Issued: January 22, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–01424 Filed 1–26–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 310
RIN 0790–AJ03
DoD Privacy Program
Deputy Chief Management
Officer, DoD.
ACTION: Final rule; amendment.
AGENCY:
This rule updates the
established policies, guidance, and
assigned responsibilities of the DoD
Privacy Program pursuant to The
Privacy Act and Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A–130;
authorizes the Defense Privacy Board
and the Defense Data Integrity Board;
prescribes uniform procedures for
implementation of and compliance with
the DoD Privacy Program; and delegates
authorities and responsibilities for the
effective administration of the DoD
Privacy Program.
53 See
PO 00000
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This rule is part of DoD’s
retrospective plan, completed in August
2011, under Executive Order 13563,
‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review.’’ DoD’s full plan and updates
can be accessed at: https://exchange.
regulations.gov/exchange/topic/eo13563.
DATES: This rule is effective February
26, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Samuel P. Jenkins, 703–571–0070.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
I. Purpose of the Regulatory Action
a. The need for the regulatory action
and how the action will meet that need.
An individual’s privacy is a
fundamental legal right that must be
respected and protected. This regulatory
action ensures that DoD’s need to
collect, use, maintain, or disseminate
personally identifiable information (PII)
about individuals for purposes of
discharging its statutory responsibilities
will be balanced against their right to be
protected against unwarranted privacy
invasions. This regulatory action also
describes the rules of conduct and
responsibilities of DoD personnel, DoD
contractors, and DoD contractor
personnel to ensure that any PII
contained in a system of records that
they access and use to conduct official
business will be protected so that the
security and confidentiality of the
information is preserved.
b. Succinct statement of legal
authority for the regulatory action
(explaining, in brief, the legal authority
laid out later in the preamble).
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a, The Privacy Act
of 1974, as amended, which requires the
implementation of the Act by Federal
agencies.
[Docket ID: DOD–2013–OS–0023]
SUMMARY:
4201
II. Summary of the Major Provisions of
the Regulatory Action in Question
This rule:
a. Establishes rules of conduct for
DoD personnel and DoD contractors
involved in the design, development,
operation, or maintenance of any system
of records.
b. Establishes appropriate
administrative, technical, and physical
safeguards to ensure the security and
confidentiality of records and to protect
against any anticipated threats or
hazards to their security or integrity that
could result in substantial harm,
embarrassment, inconvenience, or
unfairness to any individual about
whom information is maintained.
c. Ensures that guidance, assistance,
and subject matter expert support are
provided to the combatant command
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
4202
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 17 / Tuesday, January 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
privacy officers in the implementation
and execution of and compliance with
the DoD Privacy Program.
d. Ensures that laws, policies,
procedures, and systems for protecting
individual privacy rights are
implemented throughout DoD.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
III. Costs and Benefits
This regulatory action imposes no
monetary costs to the Agency or public.
The benefit to the public is the accurate
reflection of the Agency’s Privacy
Program to ensure that policies and
procedures are known to the public.
Public Comments
The Department published a proposed
rule on August 22, 2013 (78 FR 52117),
with a request for comments. The
following comments were received and
are addressed below:
Comment 1: An argument against the
elimination of the term (and position/
role) ‘‘System Manager’’. Yes, it is every
employee’s responsibility to ensure PII
is properly handled, but the System
Manager is the ‘control valve’ for each
specific SOR and should continue to
have a big say in determining ‘who’
should have access to sensitive material.
Much like the world of classified
information, being trained and having
the ‘clearance’ to access the information
is only part of the equation . . . the
concept of ‘‘need-to-know’’ is equally
important when determining access,
and the System Manager is the POC that
checks ‘‘need-to-know’’. In addition, the
System Manager knows (or should
know) which SORN authorizes the
collection of their SOR, they know with
whom the info can be shared, they know
what should be in the SOR and they
verify that info every year, they keep
track of disclosure accounting, etc. The
average user with access only knows to
protect it, and they wouldn’t know a
SORN if they tripped over it. I would
suggest returning the ‘‘System Manager’’
to this document.
DoD Response: This Comment
addresses the Rules of Conduct as
described under 32 CFR 310.8(b)(1)–(3).
These particular requirements have
been revised and incorporated into 32
CFR 310.8(j)–(l), and are now applicable
to all DoD personnel and DoD contractor
personnel, including system mangers.
This revision does not eliminate the
position/role of system managers.
Comment 2: 32 CFR 310.22. This
comment is targeted to a part of 32 CFR
part 310 that DoD saw fit to not update,
and it is a missed opportunity to clarify
current DoD practices. The DoD has
gone out of its way to establish that
sharing lists of PII with non-DoD
requestors is prohibited by FOIA. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
DoD has requested that OPM not share
DoD personnel information with
requestors, and OPM has approved that
request. DoD has gone to court
(supporting OPM), and won, in its effort
to ensure that requests for personnel
information of DoD employees is
exempt under the FOIA. (see Long v.
OPM (Case 5:05–cv–01522–NAM–DEP)).
And while the DPCLD continues to state
that ‘‘there is no DoD FOIA policy
denying the release of names of DoD
personnel below the Director, O–7, or
SES levels. All such decisions to deny
names that do not comprise a list must
be made by using the Reporters
Committee balancing test.’’, in fact DoD
has issued a policy memorandum (09
Nov 2001) stating exactly that.
Sidebarring whether it is ‘‘actual’’
DoD policy to withhold or not, I think
it is fair to say that DoD will likely
discourage or prevent release of
personnel information (either in lists
per the Nov. 2001 memo or not-in-lists
via FOIA exemptions). Therefore the
contention expressed in 32 CFR
310.22(b)(5)(i)(A) that ‘‘. . . personal
information regarding DoD civilian
employees that normally may be
released without a clearly unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy’’ is
misleading and disingenuous and
should be reworded. As presently
constituted, this wording gives the
impression that this info is normally
released, so either some DoD commands
may release it without being aware that
DoD, in practice, does exactly the
opposite, or some citizens wishing to
know how their government works may
actually think they have a chance of
getting that info from DoD without a
court fight.
If the policy memo written just after
9/11 is indeed the new permanent
policy and not, as Michael Donley
declared, that ‘‘it was believed that this
would only be a temporary policy’’,
please change the CFR to reflect that. 12
years of relying on a scrap of paper
touting a ‘temporary policy’ and not
changing Federal Regulations seems to
be circumventing the purpose of the
CFR.
DoD Response: This Comment
addresses the release of ‘‘personal
information that is normally releasable’’
as described in 32 CFR
310.22(b)(5)(i)(A). The commentator
objects to the wording ‘‘personally
information regarding DoD civilian
employees that normally may be
released without a clear unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy,’’ as
‘‘misleading and disingenuous.’’
Attention should be drawn to the use of
the word ‘‘may,’’ as in indicator that it
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
is permissible to release this
information, but not required.
Comment 3: 32 CFR 310.4(h). The
amendment to the definition of DoD
Personnel should also include
‘‘dependents of members of armed
services registered in DEERS.’’ Military
dependents receive no protection under
both the current and proposed versions
of the Privacy Program. Aside from
ongoing military operations, military
dependents are just as likely to depend
upon DoD services requiring the use of
PII and/or PHI, but are afforded no
protections.
Currently, family members are only
required to receive notice of PII spillage,
but are not afforded any civil remedies,
nor is their information protected by
criminal action against its malicious
use. See DoD 5400.11–R, sec.
C10.6.1.2.2. The Federal Tort Claims
Act (FTCA) also severely limits any torts
arising out of PII spillage by parties to
whom the Privacy Program applies. See
28 U.S.C. 2680(h). For military
dependents stationed overseas, who are
more likely to use federal contractor
services and in so doing, place their
confidential information in someone
else’s care, the FTCA might preclude
any protections at tort law for military
families whatsoever. See 28 U.S.C.
2860(k).
Protecting DEERS dependent
information has the added benefits of
enhancing national security, providing
accountability for dependents’ records,
and increasing oversight over DoD
dependents’ data by government
contractors. Protecting dependents’
privacy enhances national security by
preventing another avenue by which
malicious actors can exploit service
members. During a service member’s
deployment, DoD dependents on the
homefront frequently contact family
readiness groups and other on-base
agencies for news on their military
members, provide information to DoD
agencies to qualify for benefits, and join
military unit sponsored clubs to relieve
the stress of their loved one’s absence.
While information on the military
member would be protected under the
Privacy Program, the DoD dependent’s
information would not be. Thus, a
malicious actor could legally request
information about a service member’s
family and use it to exploit a service
member’s actions in a forward area, or
illegally gain it by hacking information
that is currently not required to be
protected.
Adding this definition also creates
accountability for DEERS dependent
records. DoD dependents often become
highly involved in on-base activities
that require sharing private information.
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 17 / Tuesday, January 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
When that DoD dependent changes duty
stations with their DoD member, there is
no accounting for the disposition of the
records the DEERS member left behind.
On-base agencies are often the same
from one base to the next. A Privacy
Program mandated recordkeeping
program would allow for more easier
integrations of service members and
their families from one duty location to
the next, by allowing a standardization
of the sharing and safekeeping of
records between ‘‘franchises’’ at
different bases. This in turn allows
service members to more rapidly begin
work at a new duty station.
Admittedly, such an amendment
possibly triggers an economic impact
analysis under E.O. 12866, and an
unfunded mandates analysis under the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, due to
the increase in costs in archiving
additional data and requiring contractor
compliance.
However, the benefit to the welfare of
our armed services, the eventual
elimination of replication of efforts in
data collection at different bases, and
the savings to DoD family members’ lost
time and wages in fighting possible
identity theft due to PII spillage, will
outweigh the burden of such an
amendment.
DoD Response: This Comment
addresses the classification of DoD
Personnel in 32 CFR 310.4(h) and
suggests the inclusion of ‘‘dependents of
members of the armed services
registered in DEERS’’ in this
classification. Although military
dependents do carry many of the same
attributes of military service members,
they are not DoD employees and
therefore cannot be classified as ‘‘DoD
Personnel.’’ The commentator also
suggests that military dependents ‘‘are
afforded no protections’’ under the
Privacy Program. Information
concerning dependents of members of
the armed services registered in DEERS
is maintained by DoD in accordance
with the Privacy Act of 1974, as
amended, which does provide
protection to military dependents.
Within the DoD Privacy Program,
‘‘family members’’ are specifically
mentioned in 32 CFR 310.14(a)(1) and
32 CFR 310.50(a)(2)(ii) with respect to
breach notification and Privacy Act
violations.
Comment 4: The Brennan Center is a
nonpartisan law and policy institute
that seeks to improve our systems of
democracy and justice. The Brennan
Center’s Liberty and National Security
Program works to further national
security policies that respect
constitutional values and the rule of law
while protecting our people.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
Specifically, the Center seeks to restore
the proper flow of information between
the government and the people, ensure
that domestic counterterrorism policies
effectively target the terrorist threat, and
secure appropriate mechanisms for
oversight and accountability.
The Brennan Center recently
published a report, What the
Government Does with Americans’ Data,
that explores the federal government’s
retention of non-criminal information
about Americans. The report
recommends specific reforms, including
reforms to the Privacy Act and limits on
the retention of information reflecting
the exercise of rights protected by the
First Amendment.
With respect to the DoD proposed
regulation, we note that a coalition of
organizations is submitting a letter
urging the DoD to require the National
Security Agency, a component of the
DoD, to publish System of Records
Notices for three NSA databases: (1) A
system containing ‘‘telephone numbers
and electronic communications
accounts/addresses/identifiers that NSA
has reason to believe are being used by
United States persons,’’ used to
distinguish U.S. persons from foreigners
in the source of targeting persons for the
purpose of surveillance under Section
702 of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act; (2) a database of email
address lists and instant messaging
‘‘buddy lists’’ belonging to U.S. citizens
and residents; and (3) a database with
information about social networks,
including data relating to U.S. persons.
We endorse this recommendation, and
believe it is critically important that the
NSA comply with its obligations to
provide the notices required by the
Privacy Act regarding searchable
databases containing information about
Americans and legal residents.
DoD Response: This Comment
addresses System of Records Notices
(SORNs) with respect to the DoD, and
with the National Security Agency
(NSA) in particular. It is DoD policy to
‘‘publish in the Federal Register upon
establishment or revision a notice of the
existence and character of the system of
records . . .’’ 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4). A
SORN is required when (1) information
about an individual is collected and
stored by a DoD Component; and (2)
that information is retrievable by a
unique personal identifier. 32 CFR
310.10. NSA has twenty-five active
SORNS that are publicly available for
review. NSA generates SORNs as
require by the Privacy Act of 1974 and
applicable DoD regulation, 32 CFR
310.10. One NSA SORN, GNSA 18,
concerns NSA ‘‘collection of operations
records.’’ GNSA 18 covers all
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4203
individuals, as that term is defined
within the Privacy Act to encompass
citizens of the United States and lawful
permanent residents. The purpose of
GNSA 18 is to allow NSA to maintain,
as that term is defined by the Privacy
Act, records on foreign intelligence,
counterintelligence, and information
systems security matters relating to the
missions of NSA. Specifically, GNSA 18
covers all individuals, as that term is
defined by the Privacy Act, who are
identified in NSA foreign intelligence,
counterintelligence, or information
system security reports, including
supportive materials. As such, the DoD
Privacy Program complies with the
Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, and as
codified at 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Comment 5: The Policy section of the
DoD’s Privacy Program currently states
that ‘‘No record shall be maintained on
how an individual exercises rights
guaranteed by the First Amendment to
the constitution. . . .’’ There are three
enumerated exceptions: When retention
is authorized by statute, where the
individual has authorized it, or ‘‘when
the record is pertinent to and within the
scope of an authorized law enforcement
activity.’’ Under the proposed rule, the
analogous section would expand the
third exception to allow information
relating to First Amendment-protected
speech to be maintained when the
records is ‘‘pertinent to and within the
scope of an authorized intelligence or
administrative investigation.’’ (This
same change is reflected in the proposed
changes to the Privacy Program’s Rules
of Conduct as well.)
This exception—both as it stands and
as revised—is simultaneously overly
broad and vague. To begin with, it is not
clear what matters are encompassed by
‘‘law enforcement activities’’; it seems
likely that those activities could include
more than an authorized investigation,
but it is unknown what other actions
might qualify as an ‘‘activity’’ and thus
trigger the ability to maintain First
Amendment-protected information. The
new terms are even more ambiguous.
‘‘Intelligence activities’’ are not defined,
and the meaning of ‘‘administrative
activities’’ is particularly uncertain; it
appears susceptible to being used as a
catch-all to permit the retention of First
Amendment-protected information in
almost any circumstances.
Furthermore, the requirement that the
record be ‘‘pertinent to and within the
scope of’’ one of the above matters is an
extremely low standard, as nearly any
record could be found to be ‘‘pertinent
to’’ a particular activity. This is
particularly true in light of the
assertions by the NSA and the DOJ that
databases containing nearly all
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
4204
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 17 / Tuesday, January 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
American’s phone records are
‘‘relevant’’ to the NSA’s activities
because some minute percentage may be
germane in the future. A higher
standard would be the ‘‘relevant and
necessary’’ standard, which is reflected
in a proposed change to the Rules of
Conduct requiring all users to
‘‘minimize the collection of [personally
identifiable information] to that which
is relevant and necessary to accomplish
a purpose of the DoD.’’
In short, the exception as proposed
would allow First Amendment-related
information to remain in an individual’s
file under almost any circumstances, as
long as there is a colorable argument
that it is related in some way, or might
be related in the future, to some law
enforcement, intelligence, or
‘‘administrative’’ matter. Because of the
ambiguity of these terms, American
citizens are left with little guidance
about the actual circumstances under
which information about their protected
speech or associations may be
maintained in DoD files.
Accordingly, we urge the DoD to
reject the proposed changes and to
significantly narrow this exception.
Appropriate steps would include: (1)
Adding definitions for ‘‘law
enforcement activities,’’ ‘‘intelligence
activities,’’ and ‘‘administrative
activities to 32 CFR 310.4, Definitions;
(2) Limiting the retention of information
reflecting the exercise of First
Amendment-protected rights to
circumstances in which it is relevant
and necessary to an authorized
investigation; (3) Ensuring that at the
close of any investigation, First
Amendment-protected information is
purged. (All information gathered about
U.S. persons should be purged if no
reasonable suspicion of criminal activity
is developed.) If this information must
be retained as part of an investigative
file that is reasonably maintained in the
ordinary course of business, it should be
masked to ensure that it is accessible in
the future only if strictly relevant and
necessary to another authorized
investigation; and (4) Specifying the
circumstances under which any PII
about Americans, including records
reflecting First Amendment-protected
activities, may be shared with other
local, state, or federal agencies, foreign
governments, or private parties or
entities.
DoD Response: This Comment
addresses the terms ‘‘law enforcement
activities,’’ ‘‘intelligence activities,’’ and
‘‘administrative activities,’’ and raises
First Amendment concerns. The
proposed revision to the DoD policy
includes that ‘‘no record will be
maintained on how an individual
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
exercises rights guaranteed by the First
Amendment . . . , except (1) when
expressly authorized by statute; (2)
when expressly authorized by the
individual that the record is about; or
(3) when the record is pertinent to and
within the scope of an authorized law
enforcement activity, including an
authorized intelligence or
administrative investigation.’’ 32 CFR
310.5(f) (proposed). The Privacy Act of
1974 permits ‘‘exception from such
requirements with respect to records
provided in this Act only in those cases
where there is an important public
policy need for such exemption as has
been determined by specific statutory
authority.’’ Public Law 93–579, Section
2(b)(5). General and Specific
Exemptions are provided in 5 U.S.C.
552a(j) and (k). As such, the DoD
Privacy Program complies with the
Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, and as
codified at 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Comment 6: By notice published
August 22, 2013, the Department of
Defense (‘‘DoD’’) proposes to amend its
Privacy Program implementing the
Privacy Act of 1974. Specifically, DoD
proposes to change its ‘‘policies,
guidance, and assigned responsibilities
of the DoD Privacy Program . . . ;
authoriz[e] the Defense Privacy Board
and the Defense Data Integrity Board;
prescrib[e] uniform procedures for
implementation of and compliance with
the DoD Privacy Program; and delegat[e]
authorities and responsibilities for the
effective administrative of the DoD
Privacy Program.’’
The proposed amendments apply to
all organizational entities within the
DoD, including the Office of the
Secretary of Defense, the Military
Departments, and the DoD Office of the
Inspector General, which the DoD refers
to collectively as the ‘‘DoD
Components.’’ The National Security
Agency (‘‘NSA’’) is an organizational
entity and agency component within the
DoD. Therefore, the DoD’s proposal
applies to the NSA.
As discussed below, NSA currently
maintains at least three unlawful
Privacy Act systems of records
pertaining to US citizens and permanent
residents. These systems of records
violate both the Privacy Act and current
DoD Privacy Program regulations.
Accordingly, pursuant to DoD’s notice
of proposed rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’), the
undersigned privacy, consumer rights,
and civil rights organizations
[hereinafter ‘‘Privacy Commentators’’]
hereby submit these comments to urge
DoD to enjoin the NSA—a DoD
component subject to the DoD Privacy
Program—from violating the Privacy Act
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and current DoD Privacy Program
regulations.
Although the DoD’s Privacy Program
NPRM is generally favorable to
individual privacy and First
Amendment rights and adheres to the
Privacy Act, the NSA’s current
collection, maintenance, and disclosure
of records violate the Privacy Act and
current DoD Privacy Program
regulations. The NSA’s activity would
also violate DoD’s proposal.
Because the NSA is under the
purview of the DoD Privacy Program,
the DoD must ensure NSA implements
‘‘information privacy protections,
including full compliance with federal
laws, regulations, and policies relating
to information privacy’’ before issuing a
final rule. Specifically, the DoD must
ensure that the NSA complies with the
Privacy Act by publishing additional
system of records notices and otherwise
adhering to the Privacy Act.
I. The Privacy Act Grants Individuals
Judicially Enforceable Rights and
Imposes Obligations on Federal
Agencies
The Privacy Act of 1974 governs
federal agency maintenance, collection,
use, and dissemination of U.S. citizen
and lawful permanent resident
‘‘records’’ contained in a ‘‘system of
records.’’ The Act broadly defines
‘‘record’’ to include: Any item,
collection, or grouping of information
about an individual that is maintained
by an agency, including, but not limited
to, his education, financial transactions,
medical history, and criminal or
employment history and that contains
his name, or the identifying number,
symbol, or other identifying particular
assigned to the individual, such as a
finger or voice print or a photograph[.]
A ‘‘system of records’’ is: A group of
any records under the control of any
agency from which information is
retrieved by the name of the individual
or by some identifying number, symbol,
or other identifying particular assigned
to the individual[.]
When it enacted the Privacy Act of
1974, Congress sought to restrict the
amount of personal information that
federal agencies could collect and
required transparency in agency
information practices. Privacy Act
legislative history reveals that the Act is
intended ‘‘to promote accountability,
responsibility, legislative oversight, and
open government with respect to the use
of computer technology in the personal
information systems data of the Federal
Government [.]’’ The Act is also
intended to guard the privacy interests
of citizens and lawful permanent
residents against government intrusion.
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 17 / Tuesday, January 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Congress found that ‘‘the privacy of an
individual is directly affected by the
collection, maintenance, use, and
dissemination of personal information
by Federal agencies,’’ and recognized
that ‘‘the right to privacy is a personal
and fundamental right to protected by
the Constitution of the United States.’’
Congress thus sought to ‘‘provide
certain protections for an individual
against an invasion of personal privacy’’
by establishing a set of procedural and
substantive rights These rights, for
example, guarantee that individuals:
• May request access to records an
agency maintains about him or her, as
well as have copies made;
• may amend a record about him or
her; and
• must be informed whom the agency
asks to supply information;
Importantly, the Privacy Act grants
individuals a private right of action and
individuals may sue federal agencies for
violating the Privacy Act.
In addition to granting individual
rights, the Privacy Act also imposes
several obligations on federal agencies,
including obligations that agencies
must:
• At least 30 days prior to publication
of each record routine, ‘‘publish in the
Federal Register notice of any new use
or intended use of the information in
the system, and provide an opportunity
for interested persons to submit written
data, views, or arguments to the
agency’’;
• not maintain records ‘‘describing
how any individual exercises rights
guaranteed by the First Amendment
unless expressly authorized by statute
or by the individual about whom the
record is maintained or unless pertinent
to and within the scope of an authorized
law enforcement activity’’;
• give individuals access to the
accounting of disclosure of their
records;
• make notes of requested
amendments within the records;
• collect records ‘‘about an individual
as is relevant and necessary to
accomplish a purpose of the agency
required to be accomplished by statute
or by executive order of the President’’;
• ‘‘collect information to the greatest
extent practicable directly from the
subject individual when the information
may result in adverse determinations
about an individual’s rights, benefits,
and privileges under Federal programs’’;
• assure that all records used by the
agency in making determinations about
an individual are accurate, relevant,
timely and complete as reasonably
necessary to maintain fairness;
• make a reasonable effort to notify an
individual when a record about him or
her is made available to another
individual when it is a matter of public
record;
• promulgate rules establishing
procedures that notify an individual in
response to record requests pertaining to
him or her, including ‘‘reasonable times,
Identifier
Preamble:
GNSA 02 ..............
GNSA 03 ..............
GNSA 05 ..............
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
GNSA
GNSA
GNSA
GNSA
14
15
16
17
..............
..............
..............
..............
GNSA
GNSA
GNSA
GNSA
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
GNSA
GNSA
GNSA
GNSA
GNSA
GNSA
GNSA
18
19
20
21
..............
..............
..............
..............
GNSA 22 ..............
GNSA 24 ..............
GNSA 25 ..............
GNSA 26 ..............
GNSA 27 ..............
VerDate Sep<11>2014
places, and requirements for identifying
an individual’’, institute disclosure
procedures for medical and
psychological records, create procedures
to review amendment requests, as well
as determine the request, the status of
appeals to denial of requests, and
establish fees for record duplication,
excluding the cost for search and review
of the record;
In addition to assessing ‘‘reasonable
attorney fees and other litigation costs’’
for noncompliant agencies, courts may
order agencies to amend individuals
records, as well as ‘‘enjoin the agency
from withholding records.’’ The Act also
imposes criminal penalties for officers
and agency employees who willfully
disclose agency records in violation of
the Privacy Act or Privacy Act
regulations.
II. NSA Record Maintenance, Collection,
Use, and Dissemination Are Subject to
the Privacy Act and DoD Privacy
Program Regulations
The NSA is an ‘‘agency’’ as defined in
the Privacy Act. The NSA is also a DoD
organizational entity within the DoD.
Accordingly, NSA is subject to the
Privacy Act, current DoD Privacy
Program regulations, and the NPRM.
Pursuant to the Privacy Act and DoD
Privacy Program regulations, the NSA
has published twenty-six systems of
records. These are as follows:
Notices
Exemptions claimed
NSA/CSS Applicants (June 5, 2008, 73 FR 31997) ...........................................
NSA/CSS Correspondence, Cases, Complaints, Visitors, Requests (February
22, 1993, 58 FR 10531).
NSA/CSS Equal Employment Opportunity Data Statistical Data (December
30, 2008, 73 FR 79851).
NSA/CSS Health, Medical and Safety Files (March 15, 2012, 77 FR 15360) ...
NSA/CSS Motor Vehicles and Carpools (July 25, 2008, 73 FR 43411) ............
NSA/CSS Payroll Processing File (October 3, 2012, 77 FR 60401) .................
NSA/CSS Personnel File (December 30, 2011, 76 FR 82283) .........................
NSA/CSS Personnel Security File (June 16, 2009, 74 FR 28483) ....................
NSA/CSS Key Accountability Records (June 28, 2010, 75 FR 36642) .............
NSA/CSS Education, Training and Workforce Development (March 24, 2009,
74 FR 12116).
NSA/CSS Library Patron File Control System (July 30, 2013, 78 FR 45913) ...
NSA/CSS Computer Users Control System (February 5, 2010, 75 FR 6000) ..
NSA/CSS Drug Testing Program (September 22, 2011, 76 FR 58787).
NSA/CSS Employee Assistance Service Case Records (November 14, 2011,
76 FR 70427).
Operations Records (November 30, 2010, 75 FR 74019). ................................
NSA/CSS Child Development Services (December 4, 2009, 74 FR 63732).
NSA Police Operational Files (April 23, 2010, 75 FR 21250) ............................
NSA/CSS Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) and Non-appropriated
Fund Instrumentality (NAFI) Files (May 7, 2010, 75 FR 25215).
Garnishment Processing Files, (October 25, 2010, 75 FR 65457).
NSA/CSS Pre-Publication Review Records (September 15, 2010, 75 FR
56079).
NSA/CSS Travel Records (September 13, 2012, 77 FR 56626) .......................
NSA/CSS Accounts Receivable, Indebtedness and Claims ( August 19, 2009,
74 FR 41872).
Information Assurance Scholarship Program (October 5, 2011, 76 FR 61679).
17:35 Jan 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
4205
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
(k)(1) and (k)(5).
(k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(4), (k)(5).
(k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(4).
(k)(1), (k)(4), (k)(5),
(k)(1).
(k)(1) and (k)(2).
(k)(1), (k)(4), (k)(5),
(k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(5),
(k)(2).
(k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(5),
(k)(6).
(k)(6).
(k)(6).
(k)(6).
(k)(1) and (k)(4).
(k)(1) and (k)(2).
(j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(4), and (k)(5).
(k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(5).
(k)(2), (k)(4), and (k)(5).
(k)(2), (k)(4).
(k)(4).
27JAR1
4206
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 17 / Tuesday, January 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Identifier
GNSA 28 ..............
GNSA 29 ..............
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
GNSA 30 ..............
Notices
Freedom of Information Act, Privacy Act and Mandatory Declassification Review Records (January 19, 2011, 76 FR 3098).
NSA/CSS Office of Inspector General Investigations and Complaints (May 3,
2012, 77 FR 26254).
Congressional, Executive, and Political Inquiry Records (September 13, 2012,
77 FR 56628).
III. NSA’s Maintenance, Collection, Use,
and Dissemination of Records From
Unpublished System of Records Violate
the Privacy Act and DoD Privacy
Program Regulations
Recent Administration admissions
and NSA documents reveal that over the
last several years, NSA has maintained
at least three unpublished system of
records that allow the agency to retrieve
information by ‘‘identifying number[s],
symbol[s], or other identifying
particular[s] assigned to . . .
individual[s].’’ These groups of records
violate the Privacy Act and DoD Privacy
Program regulations because they were
collected without individual consent,
public notice, and other Privacy Act
procedural requirements.
The first unlawful NSA system of
records contains ‘‘telephone numbers
and electronic communications
accounts/addresses/identifiers that NSA
has reason to believe are being used by
United States persons.’’ The NSA uses
these ‘‘identifying numbers, symbols,
and other particulars’’ to retrieve
information to identify if an individual
whom the NSA intends to monitor is a
U.S. person.
The second unlawful NSA system of
records is comprised of contact lists that
the NSA retrieves from email address
books and instant message ‘‘buddy
lists.’’ In this system of records, the NSA
gathers email contact lists and instant
message buddy lists that traverse global
data links. The contact lists and buddy
lists include those belonging to U.S.
citizens. The lists are maintained within
a searchable contact list database that
permits the NSA to retrieve information
by an ‘‘identifying number, symbol, or
other identifying particular,’’—i.e.,
email addresses and instant message
accounts.
Furthermore, email contact lists, in
particular, can contain other identifying
information beyond the email address of
the contact, such as name, address,
business association, and relationship to
the contact.
The third unlawful NSA system of
records is a database containing
information relating to social networks.
Within this system of records, the NSA
maintains information on social
connections (e.g. associates or travel
companions), location information,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Exemptions claimed
17:35 Jan 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
email addresses, phone numbers, and
publicly available information from
commercial entities, as well as location
at certain times among other personal
information. The NSA retrieves
information in this system of records to
perform social network analysis.
General Keith Alexander confirmed the
social networking analysis, stating that
the Supplemental Procedures allow the
NSA ‘‘to use metadata that [it has]
acquired under Executive Order 12–333
and chain, whether it’s phone records or
emails, it through U.S. selectors to
figure out social networks abroad.’’
General Alexander confirmed that the
2009 Supplemental Procedures are still
being used.
All three of the aforementioned NSA
systems of records violate the Privacy
Act and DoD Privacy Program
regulations because the NSA has failed
to publish system of records notices for
each of the system of records. None of
the NSA’s twenty-six published SORNs
listed above describes the type of data
collection or dissemination that the
NSA is conducting with these systems
of records. Moreover, they violate the
Privacy Act and DoD Privacy Program
regulations because the records were
collected without individual notice,
consent, or other Privacy Act rights.
Finally, each of the three unpublished
systems of records maintains records
describing how individuals exercise
their First Amendment rights, including
press freedoms, and the rights to freely
associate and assemble. The Privacy Act
forbids agencies from maintaining these
types of records ‘‘unless expressly
authorized by statute or by the
individual about whom the record is
maintained or unless pertinent to and
within the scope of an authorized law
enforcement activity.’’ In addition to the
aforementioned Privacy Act violations,
the NSA has violated and continues to
violate the Privacy Act by maintaining
records describing how individuals
exercise their First Amendment rights.
Conclusion. The NSA is currently in
violation of the Privacy Act and DoD
Privacy Program regulations. The DoD
must ensure that the NSA complies with
the Privacy Act by publishing additional
system of records notices and otherwise
adhering to the Privacy Act before it can
adopt its current proposal.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(k)(1) through (k)(7).
(j)(2),(k)(2), (k)(5).
DoD Response: This Comment
addresses System of Records Notices
(SORNs) with respect to the DoD, and
with the National Security Agency
(NSA) in particular. It is DoD policy to
‘‘publish in the Federal Register upon
establishment or revision a notice of the
existence and character of the system of
records . . .’’ 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4). A
SORN is required when (1) information
about an individual is collected and
stored by a DoD Component; and (2)
that information is retrievable by a
unique personal identifier. 32 CFR
310.10 NSA has twenty-five active
SORNS that are publicly available for
review. NSA generates SORNs as
require by the Privacy Act of 1974 and
applicable DoD regulation, 32 CFR
310.10. One NSA SORN, GNSA 18,
concerns NSA ‘‘collection of operations
records.’’ GNSA 18 covers all
individuals, as that term is defined
within the Privacy Act to encompass
citizens of the United States and lawful
permanent residents. The purpose of
GNSA 18 is to allow NSA to maintain,
as that term is defined by the Privacy
Act, records on foreign intelligence,
counterintelligence, and information
systems security matters relating to the
missions of NSA. Specifically, GNSA 18
covers all individuals, as that term is
defined by the Privacy Act, who are
identified in NSA foreign intelligence,
counterintelligence, or information
system security reports, including
supportive materials. As such, the DoD
Privacy Program complies with the
Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, and as
codified at 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Regulatory Procedures
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ and Executive
Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation
and Regulatory Review’’
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distribute impacts, and equity).
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 17 / Tuesday, January 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule has been
designated a ‘‘substantive nonsignificant regulatory action.’’
Sec. 202, Public Law 104–4, ‘‘Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act’’
It has been determined that 32 CFR
part 310 does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditure
by State, local and tribal governments,
in aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100 million or more in any one year.
Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory
Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. 601)
It has been certified that 32 CFR part
310 is not subject to the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601) because it
would not, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork
Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been determined that 32 CFR
part 310 does not impose reporting or
recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’
It has been determined that 32 CFR
part 310 does not have federalism
implications, as set forth in Executive
Order 13132. This rule does not have
substantial direct effects on:
(1) The States;
(2) The relationship between the
National Government and the States; or
(3) The distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of Government.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 310
Privacy.
Accordingly 32 CFR part 310 is
amended as follows:
PART 310—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR
part 310 is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Subpart A—[Amended]
2. Section 310.2 is revised to read as
follows:
■
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 310.2
Purpose.
This part:
(a) Updates the established policies
and assigned responsibilities of the DoD
Privacy Program pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552a (also known and referred to in this
part as ‘‘The Privacy Act’’) and Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
Circular No. A–130.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
(b) Authorizes the Defense Privacy
Board and the Defense Data Integrity
Board.
(c) Prescribes uniform procedures for
implementation of and compliance with
the DoD Privacy Program.
(d) Delegates authorities and
responsibilities for the effective
administration of the DoD Privacy
Program.
■ 3. Section 310.3 is revised to read as
follows:
§ 310.3
Applicability and scope.
(a) This part applies to the Office of
the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the
Military Departments, the Office of the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and
the Joint Staff, the Combatant
Commands, the Office of the Inspector
General of the Department of Defense,
the Defense Agencies, the DoD Field
Activities, and all other organizational
entities within the DoD (referred to
collectively in this part as the ‘‘DoD
Components’’).
(b) For the purposes of subsection (i),
‘‘Criminal penalties,’’ of The Privacy
Act, any DoD contractor and any
employee of such a contractor will be
considered to be an employee of DoD
when DoD provides by a contract for the
operation by or on behalf of DoD of a
system of records to accomplish a DoD
function. DoD will, consistent with its
authority, cause the requirements of
section (m) of The Privacy Act to be
applied to such systems.
■ 4. Section 310.4 is revised to read as
follows:
§ 310.4
Definitions.
The following definitions apply to
this part:
Access. The review of a record or a
copy of a record or parts thereof in a
system of records by any individual.
Agency. For the purposes of
disclosing records subject to the Privacy
Act among the DoD Components, the
Department of Defense is considered a
single agency. For all other purposes to
include requests for access and
amendment, denial of access or
amendment, appeals from denials, and
record keeping as relating to release of
records to non-DoD Agencies, each DoD
Component is considered an agency
within the meaning of the Privacy Act.
Breach. A loss of control,
compromise, unauthorized disclosure,
unauthorized acquisition, unauthorized
access, or any similar term referring to
situations where persons other than
authorized users and for an other than
authorized purpose have access or
potential access to personally
identifiable information (PII), whether
physical or electronic.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4207
Computer matching. The
computerized comparison of two or
more automated systems of records or a
system of records with non-federal
records. Manual comparisons are not
covered.
Confidential source. A person or
organization who has furnished
information to the Federal Government
under an express promise, if made on or
after September 27, 1975, that the
person’s or the organization’s identity
shall be held in confidence or under an
implied promise of such confidentiality
if this implied promise was made on or
before September 26, 1975.
Disclosure. The information sharing
or transfer of any PII from a system of
records by any means of communication
(such as oral, written, electronic,
mechanical, or actual review) to any
person, government agency, or private
entity other than the subject of the
record, the subject’s designated agent, or
the subject’s legal guardian.
DoD contractor. Any individual or
other legal entity that:
(1) Directly or indirectly (e.g., through
an affiliate) submits offers for or is
awarded, or reasonably may be expected
to submit offers for or be awarded, a
government contract, including a
contract for carriage under government
or commercial bills of lading, or a
subcontract under a government
contract; or
(2) Conducts business, or reasonably
may be expected to conduct business,
with the federal government as an agent
or representative of another contractor.
DoD personnel. Service members and
federal civilian employees.
Federal benefit program. A program
administered or funded by the Federal
Government, or by any agent or State on
behalf of the Federal Government,
providing cash or in-kind assistance in
the form of payments, grants, loans, or
loan guarantees to individuals.
Federal personnel. Officers and
employees of the Government of the
United States, members of the
uniformed services (including members
of the Reserve Components), individuals
entitled to receive immediate or
deferred retirement benefits under any
retirement program of the United States
(including survivor benefits).
Individual. A living person who is a
U.S. citizen or an alien lawfully
admitted for permanent residence. The
parent of a minor or the legal guardian
of any individual also may act on behalf
of an individual, except as otherwise
provided in this part. Members of the
Military Services are ‘‘individuals.’’
Corporations, partnerships, sole
proprietorships, professional groups,
businesses, whether incorporated or
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
4208
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 17 / Tuesday, January 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
unincorporated, and other commercial
entities are not ‘‘individuals’’ when
acting in an entrepreneurial capacity
with the DoD, but persons employed by
such organizations or entities are
‘‘individuals’’ when acting in a personal
capacity (e.g., security clearances,
entitlement to DoD privileges or
benefits).
Individual access. Access to
information pertaining to the individual
by the individual or his or her
designated agent or legal guardian.
Information sharing environment.
Defined in Public Law 108–458, ‘‘The
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004’’.
Lost, stolen, or compromised
information. Actual or possible loss of
control, unauthorized disclosure, or
unauthorized access of personal
information where persons other than
authorized users gain access or potential
access to such information for an other
than authorized purpose where one or
more individuals will be adversely
affected. Such incidents also are known
as breaches.
Maintain. The collection,
maintenance, use, or dissemination of
records contained in a system of
records.
Member of the public. Any individual
or party acting in a private capacity to
include Federal employees or military
personnel.
Mixed system of records. Any system
of records that contains information
about individuals as defined by the
Privacy Act and non-U.S. citizens and/
or aliens not lawfully admitted for
permanent residence.
Non-Federal agency. Any state or
local government, or agency thereof,
which receives records contained in a
system of records from a source agency
for use in a computer matching
program.
Official use. Within the context of this
part, this term is used when officials
and employees of a DoD Component
have a demonstrated a need for the
record or the information contained
therein in the performance of their
official duties, subject to DoD 5200.1–
R.3
Personally identifiable information
(PII). Information used to distinguish or
trace an individual’s identity, such as
name, social security number, date and
place of birth, mother’s maiden name,
biometric records, home phone
numbers, other demographic, personnel,
medical, and financial information. PII
includes any information that is linked
or linkable to a specified individual,
alone, or when combined with other
3 See
footnote 1 to § 310.1
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
personal or identifying information. For
purposes of this part, the term PII also
includes personal information and
information in identifiable form.
Privacy Act request. A request from an
individual for notification as to the
existence of, access to, or amendment of
records pertaining to that individual.
These records must be maintained in a
system of records.
Protected health information (PHI).
Defined in DoD 6025.18–R, ‘‘DoD Health
Information Privacy Regulation’’
(available at https://www.dtic.mil/whs/
directives/corres/pdf/602518r.pdf).
Recipient agency. Any agency, or
contractor thereof, receiving records
contained in a system of records from a
source agency for use in a computer
matching program.
Record. Any item, collection, or
grouping of information in any media
(e.g., paper, electronic), about an
individual that is maintained by a DoD
Component, including, but not limited
to, education, financial transactions,
medical history, criminal or
employment history, and that contains
the name, or identifying number,
symbol, or other identifying particular
assigned to the individual, such as a
fingerprint, a voice print, or a
photograph.
Risk assessment. An analysis
considering information sensitivity,
vulnerabilities, and cost in safeguarding
personal information processed or
stored in the facility or activity.
Routine use. The disclosure of a
record outside the Department of
Defense for a use that is compatible with
the purpose for which the information
was collected and maintained by the
Department of Defense. The routine use
must be included in the published
system notice for the system of records
involved.
Source agency. Any agency which
discloses records contained in a system
of records to be used in a computer
matching program, or any state or local
government, or agency thereof, which
discloses records to be used in a
computer matching program.
Statistical record. A record
maintained only for statistical research
or reporting purposes and not used in
whole or in part in making
determinations about specific
individuals.
System of records. A group of records
under the control of a DoD Component
from which PII is retrieved by the
individual’s name or by some
identifying number, symbol, or other
identifying particular uniquely assigned
to an individual.
System of records notice (SORN). A
notice published in the Federal Register
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
that constitutes official notification to
the public of the existence of a system
of records.
■ 5. Section 310.5 is revised to read as
follows:
§ 310.5
Policy.
It is DoD policy that:
(a) An individual’s privacy is a
fundamental legal right that must be
respected and protected.
(1) The DoD’s need to collect, use,
maintain, or disseminate (also known
and referred to in this part as
‘‘maintain’’) PII about individuals for
purposes of discharging its statutory
responsibilities will be balanced against
their right to be protected against
unwarranted privacy invasions.
(2) The DoD protects individuals’
rights, consistent with federal laws,
regulations, and policies, when
maintaining their PII.
(3) DoD personnel and DoD
contractors have an affirmative
responsibility to protect an individual’s
privacy when maintaining his or her PII.
(4) Consistent with section 1016(d) of
Public Law 108–458 and section 1 of
Executive Order 13388, ‘‘Further
Strengthening the Sharing of Terrorism
Information to Protect Americans’’, the
DoD will protect information privacy
and provide other protections relating to
civil liberties and legal rights in the
development and use of the information
sharing environment.
(b) The DoD establishes rules of
conduct for DoD personnel and DoD
contractors involved in the design,
development, operation, or maintenance
of any system of records. DoD personnel
and DoD contractors will be trained
with respect to such rules and the
requirements of this section and any
other rules and procedures adopted
pursuant to this section and the
penalties for noncompliance. The DoD
Rules of Conduct are established in
§ 310.8.
(c) DoD personnel and DoD
contractors conduct themselves
consistent with the established rules of
conduct in § 310.8, so that records
maintained in a system of records will
only be maintained as authorized by 5
U.S.C. 552a and this part.
(d) DoD legislative, regulatory, or
other policy proposals will be evaluated
to ensure consistency with the
information privacy requirements of this
part.
(e) Pursuant to The Privacy Act, no
record will be maintained on how an
individual exercises rights guaranteed
by the First Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States
(referred to in this part as ‘‘the First
Amendment’’), except:
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 17 / Tuesday, January 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
(1) When specifically authorized by
statute.
(2) When expressly authorized by the
individual that the record is about.
(3) When the record is pertinent to
and within the scope of an authorized
law enforcement activity, including an
authorized intelligence or
administrative investigation.
(f) Disclosure of records pertaining to
an individual from a system of records
is prohibited except with his or her
consent or as otherwise authorized by 5
U.S.C. 552a and this part or 32 CFR part
286. When DoD Components make such
disclosures, the individual may, to the
extent authorized by 5 U.S.C. 552a and
this part, obtain a description of such
disclosures from the Component
concerned.
(g) Disclosure of records pertaining to
personnel of the National Security
Agency, the Defense Intelligence
Agency, the National Reconnaissance
Office, and the National GeospatialIntelligence Agency is prohibited to the
extent authorized by Public Law 86–36,
‘‘National Security Agency-Officers and
Employees’’ and 10 U.S.C. 424.
Disclosure of records pertaining to
personnel of overseas, sensitive, or
routinely deployable units is prohibited
to the extent authorized by 10 U.S.C.
130b.
(h) The DoD establishes appropriate
administrative, technical, and physical
safeguards to ensure the security and
confidentiality of records and to protect
against any anticipated threats or
hazards to their security or integrity that
could result in substantial harm,
embarrassment, inconvenience, or
unfairness to any individual about
whom information is maintained.
(i) Disclosure of PHI will be consistent
with DoD 6025.18–R.
(j) All DoD personnel and DoD
contractors will be provided training
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a and OMB
Circular No. A–130.
(k) PII collected, used, maintained, or
disseminated will be:
(1) Relevant and necessary to
accomplish a lawful DoD purpose
required by statute or Executive Order.
(2) Collected to the greatest extent
practicable directly from the individual.
He or she will be informed as to why the
information is being collected, the
authority for collection, how it will be
used, whether disclosure is mandatory
or voluntary, and the consequences of
not providing that information.
(3) Relevant, timely, complete, and
accurate for its intended use.
(4) Protected using appropriate
administrative, technical, and physical
safeguards based on the media (e.g.,
paper, electronic) involved. Protection
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
will ensure the security of the records
and prevent compromise or misuse
during maintenance, including working
at authorized alternative worksites.
(l) Individuals are permitted, to the
extent authorized by 5 U.S.C. 552a and
this part, to:
(1) Upon request by an individual,
gain access to records or to any
information pertaining to the individual
which is contained in a system of
records.
(2) Obtain a copy of such records, in
whole or in part.
(3) Correct or amend such records
once it has been determined that the
records are not accurate, relevant,
timely, or complete.
(4) Appeal a denial for a request to
access or a request to amend a record.
(m) Non-U.S. citizens and aliens not
lawfully admitted for permanent
residence may request access to and
amendment of records pertaining to
them; however, this part does not create
or extend any right pursuant to The
Privacy Act to them.
(n) SORNs and notices of proposed or
final rulemaking are published in the
Federal Register (FR), and reports are
submitted to Congress and OMB, in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a, OMB
Circular No. A–130, and this part,
Volume 1 of DoD Manual 8910.01, ‘‘DoD
Information Collections Manual:
Procedures for DoD Internal Information
Collections’’ (available at https://www.
dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/
891001m_vol1.pdf), and DoD
Instruction 5545.02, ‘‘DoD Policy for
Congressional Authorization and
Appropriations Reporting
Requirements’’ (available at https://www.
dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/
554502p.pdf). Information about an
individual maintained in a new system
of records will not be collected until the
required SORN publication and review
requirements are satisfied.
(o) All DoD personnel must make
reasonable efforts to inform an
individual, at their last known address,
when any record about him or her is
disclosed:
(1) Due to a compulsory legal process.
(2) In a manner that will become a
matter of public record.
(p) Individuals must be notified in a
timely manner, consistent with the
requirements of this part, if there is a
breach of their PII.
(q) At least 30 days prior to disclosure
of information pursuant to subparagraph
(e)(4)(D) (routine uses) of The Privacy
Act, the DoD will publish an FR notice
of any new use or intended use of the
information in the system, and provide
an opportunity for interested people to
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4209
submit written data, views, or
arguments to the agency.
(r) Computer matching programs
between the DoD Components and
federal, state, or local governmental
agencies are conducted in accordance
with the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 552a,
OMB Circular No. A–130, and this part.
(s) The DoD will publish in the FR
notice any establishment or revision of
a matching program at least 30 days
prior to conducting such program of
such establishment or revision if any
DoD Component is a recipient agency or
a source agency in a matching program
with a non-federal agency.
■ 6. Revise § 310.6 to read as follows:
§ 310.6
Responsibilities.
(a) The Deputy Chief Management
Officer of the Department of Defense
(DCMO):
(1) Serves as the Senior Agency
Official for Privacy (SAOP) for the DoD.
These duties, in accordance with OMB
Memorandum M–05–08, ‘‘Designation
of Senior Agency Officials for Privacy’’
(available at https://www.whitehouse.
gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/omb/
memoranda/fy2005/m05-08.pdf),
include:
(i) Ensuring DoD implementation of
information privacy protections,
including full compliance with federal
laws, regulations, and policies relating
to information privacy.
(ii) Overseeing, coordinating, and
facilitating DoD privacy compliance
efforts.
(iii) Ensuring that DoD personnel and
DoD contractors receive appropriate
training and education programs
regarding the information privacy laws,
regulations, policies, and procedures
governing DoD-specific procedures for
handling of PII.
(2) Provides rules of conduct and
policy for, and coordinates and oversees
administration of, the DoD Privacy
Program to ensure compliance with
policies and procedures in 5 U.S.C. 552a
and OMB Circular No. A–130.
(3) Publishes this part and other
guidance to ensure timely and uniform
implementation of the DoD Privacy
Program.
(4) Serves as the chair of the Defense
Privacy Board and the Defense Data
Integrity Board.
(5) As requested, ensures that
guidance, assistance, and subject matter
expert support are provided to the
Combatant Command privacy officers in
the implementation and execution of
and compliance with the DoD Privacy
Program.
(6) Acts as The Privacy Act Access
and Amendment appellate authority for
OSD and the Office of the Chairman of
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
4210
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 17 / Tuesday, January 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
the Joint Chiefs of Staff when an
individual is denied access to or
amendment of records pursuant to The
Privacy Act, DoD Directive 5105.53,
‘‘Director of Administration and
Management (DA&M)’’ (available at
https://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/
corres/pdf/510553p.pdf), and Deputy
Secretary of Defense Memorandum,
‘‘Reorganization of the Office of the
Deputy Chief Management Officer.’’
(b) Under the authority, direction, and
control of the DCMO, through the
Director for Oversight and Compliance,
the Chief, Defense Privacy and Civil
Liberties Division (DPCLD):
(1) Ensures that laws, policies,
procedures, and systems for protecting
individual privacy rights are
implemented throughout DoD.
(2) Oversees and provides strategic
direction for the DoD Privacy Program.
(3) Assists the DCMO in performing
the responsibilities in paragraphs (a)(1)–
(a)(6) of this section.
(4) Reviews DoD legislative,
regulatory, and other policy proposals
that contain information on privacy
issues relating to how the DoD keeps its
PII. These reviews must include any
proposed legislation, testimony, and
comments having privacy implications
in accordance with DoD Directive
5500.01, ‘‘Preparing, Processing, and
Coordinating Legislation, Executive
Orders, Proclamations, Views Letters,
and Testimony’’ (available at https://
www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/
550001p.pdf).
(5) Reviews proposed new, altered,
and amended systems of records.
Submits required SORNs for publication
in the FR and, when required, provides
advance notification to OMB and
Congress consistent with 5 U.S.C. 552a,
OMB Circular No. A–130, and this part.
(6) Reviews proposed DoD
Component privacy exemption rules.
Submits the exemption rules for
publication in the FR, and submits
reports to OMB and Congress consistent
with 5 U.S.C. 552a, OMB Circular No.
A–130, and this part.
(7) Develops, coordinates, and
maintains all DoD computer matching
agreements. Submits required match
notices for publication in the FR and
provides advance notification to OMB
and Congress consistent with 5 U.S.C.
552a, OMB Circular No. A–130, and this
part.
(8) Provides guidance, assistance, and
support to the DoD Components in their
implementation of the DoD Privacy
Program to ensure that:
(i) All requirements developed to
maintain PII conform to the DoD Privacy
Program standards.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
(ii) Appropriate procedures and
safeguards are developed and
implemented to protect PII when it is
collected, used, maintained, or
disseminated in any media.
(iii) Specific procedures and
safeguards are developed and
implemented when PII is collected and
maintained for research purposes.
(9) Compiles data in support of the
DoD Chief Information Officer (DoD
CIO) submission of the Federal
Information Security Management Act
(FISMA) Privacy Reports, pursuant to
OMB Memorandum M–06–15,
‘‘Safeguarding Personally Identifiable
Information’’ (available at https://www.
whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/
memoranda/fy2006/m-06-15.pdf); the
Biennial Matching Activity Report to
OMB, in accordance with OMB Circular
No. A–130 and this part; the semiannual
Section 803 report in accordance with
42 U.S.C. 2000ee and 2000ee–1; and
other reports as required.
(10) Reviews and coordinates on DoD
Component privacy program
implementation rules to ensure they are
in compliance with the DoD-level
guidance.
(11) Provides operational and
administrative support to the Defense
Privacy Board and the Defense Data
Integrity Board.
(c) The General Counsel of the
Department of Defense (GC DoD):
(1) Provides advice and assistance on
all legal matters related to the
administration of the DoD Privacy
Program.
(2) Appoints a designee to serve as a
member of the Defense Privacy Board
and the Defense Data Integrity Board.
(3) When a DoD Privacy Program
group is created, appoints a designee to
serve as a member.
(d) The DoD Component heads:
(1) Provide adequate funding and
personnel to establish and support an
effective DoD Privacy Program.
(2) Establish DoD Component-specific
procedures in compliance with this part
and publish these procedures as well as
rules of conduct in the FR.
(3) Establish and implement
appropriate administrative, physical,
and technical safeguards and
procedures prescribed in this part and
other DoD Privacy Program guidance.
(4) Ensure Component compliance
with supplemental guidance and
procedures in accordance with all
applicable federal laws, regulations,
policies, and procedures.
(5) Appoint a Component senior
official for privacy (CSOP) to support
the SAOP in carrying out the SAOP’s
duties identified in OMB Memorandum
M–05–08.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(6) Appoint a Component privacy
officer to administer the DoD Privacy
Program, on behalf of the CSOP.
(7) Ensure DoD personnel and DoD
contractors having primary
responsibility for implementing the DoD
Privacy Program receive appropriate
privacy training. This training must be
consistent with the requirements of this
part and will address the provisions of
5 U.S.C. 552a, OMB Circular No. A–130,
and this part.
(8) Ensure that all DoD Component
legislative, regulatory, or other policy
proposals are evaluated to ensure
consistency with the information
privacy requirements of this part.
(9) Assess the impact of technology on
the privacy of PII and, when feasible,
adopt privacy-enhancing technology to:
(i) Preserve and protect PII contained
in a DoD Component system of records.
(ii) Audit compliance with the
requirements of this part.
(10) Ensure that officials who have
specialized knowledge of the DoD
Privacy Program periodically review
Component implementation of and
compliance with the DoD Privacy
Program.
(11) Submit reports, consistent with
the requirements of this part, in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a and OMB
Circular No. A–130, and as otherwise
directed by the Chief, DPCLD.
(e) In addition to the responsibilities
in paragraph (d), the Secretaries of the
Military Departments provide program
and financial support to the Combatant
Commands as identified in DoD
Directive 5100.03, ‘‘Support to the
Headquarters of Combatant and
Subordinate Unified Commands’’
(available at https://www.dtic.mil/whs/
directives/corres/pdf/510003p.pdf) to
fund, without reimbursement, the
administrative and logistic support
required by combatant and subordinate
unified command headquarters to
perform their assigned missions
effectively.
§ 310.7
[Removed and Reserved]
7. Section 310.7 is removed and
reserved.
■ 8. Section 310.8 is revised to read as
follows:
■
§ 310.8
Rules of conduct.
In accordance with section (e)(9) of
The Privacy Act, this section provides
DoD rules of conduct for the
development, operation, and
maintenance of systems of records. DoD
personnel and DoD contractor personnel
will:
(a) Take action to ensure that any PII
contained in a system of records that
they access and use to conduct official
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 17 / Tuesday, January 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
business will be protected so that the
security and confidentiality of the
information is preserved.
(b) Not disclose any PII contained in
any system of records, except as
authorized by The Privacy Act, or other
applicable statute, Executive order,
regulation, or policy. Those willfully
making any unlawful or unauthorized
disclosure, knowing that disclosure is
prohibited, may be subject to criminal
penalties and/or administrative
sanctions.
(c) Report any unauthorized
disclosures of PII from a system of
records to the applicable Privacy point
of contact (POC) for the respective DoD
Component.
(d) Report the maintenance of any
system of records not authorized by this
part to the applicable Privacy POC for
the respective DoD Component.
(e) Minimize the collection of PII to
that which is relevant and necessary to
accomplish a purpose of the DoD.
(f) Not maintain records describing
how any individual exercises rights
guaranteed by the First Amendment,
except:
(1) When specifically authorized by
statute.
(2) When expressly authorized by the
individual that the record is about.
(3) When the record is pertinent to
and within the scope of an authorized
law enforcement activity, including
authorized intelligence or
administrative activities.
(g) Safeguard the privacy of all
individuals and the confidentiality of all
PII.
(h) Limit the availability of records
containing PII to DoD personnel and
DoD contractors who have a need to
know in order to perform their duties.
(i) Prohibit unlawful possession,
collection, or disclosure of PII, whether
or not it is within a system of records.
(j) Ensure that all DoD personnel and
DoD contractors who either have access
to a system of records or develop or
supervise procedures for handling
records in a system of records are aware
of their responsibilities and are properly
trained to safeguard PII being
maintained under the DoD Privacy
Program.
(k) Prepare any required new,
amended, or altered SORN for a given
system of records and submit the SORN
through their DoD Component Privacy
POC to the Chief, DPCLD, for
coordination and submission for
publication in the FR.
(l) Not maintain any official files on
individuals, which are retrieved by the
name of the individual or by some
identifying number, symbol, or other
identifying particular assigned to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:35 Jan 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
individual, also known as a system of
records, without first ensuring that a
notice has been published in the FR.
Any official who willfully maintains a
system of records without meeting the
publication requirements as prescribed
by this part and The Privacy Act may be
subject to criminal penalties and/or
administrative sanctions.
(m) Maintain all records in a mixed
system of records as if all the records in
such a system are subject to The Privacy
Act.
■ 9. Amend § 310.9 to revise paragraphs
(a) and (b) to read as follows:
§ 310.9 Privacy boards and office,
composition and responsibilities.
(a) The Defense Privacy Board—(1)
Membership. The Board consists of:
(i) Voting members. Representatives
designated by the Secretaries of the
Military Departments and the following
officials or their designees:
(A) The DCMO, who serves as the
chair.
(B) The Chief, DPCLD, who serves as
the Executive Secretary and as a
member.
(C) The Under Secretary of Defense
for Personnel and Readiness.
(D) The Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Health Affairs.
(E) The DoD CIO.
(F) The Director, Defense Manpower
Data Center.
(G) The Director, Executive Services
Directorate, Washington Headquarters
Services (WHS).
(H) The GC DoD.
(I) The Chief of the National Guard
Bureau.
(ii) Non-voting members. Non-voting
members are the Director, Enterprise
Information Technology Services
Directorate (EITSD), WHS; and the
representatives designated by Defense
Agency and DoD Field Activity
directors.
(2) Responsibilities. The Board:
(i) Serves as the primary DoD policy
forum for matters involving the DoD
Privacy Program, meeting as necessary
to address issues of common concern to
ensure that consistent policy is adopted
and followed by the DoD Components.
The Board issues advisory opinions, as
necessary, on the DoD Privacy Program
to promote uniform and consistent
application of 5 U.S.C. 552a, OMB
Circular No. A–130, and this part.
(ii) Establishes and convenes
committees as necessary.
(iii) Establishes working groups
whose membership is composed of DoD
Component privacy officers and others
as necessary.
(b) The Defense Data Integrity
Board—(1) Membership. The Board
consists of:
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4211
(i) The DCMO, who serves as the
chair.
(ii) The Chief, DPCLD, who serves as
the Executive Secretary.
(iii) The representatives designated by
the Secretaries of the Military
Departments; the DoD CIO; the GC DoD;
the Inspector General of the Department
of Defense, who is a non-voting advisory
member; the Director, EITSD; and the
Director, Defense Manpower Data
Center.
(2) Responsibilities. The Board:
(i) Oversees and coordinates,
consistent with the requirements of 5
U.S.C. 552a, OMB Circular No. A–130,
and this part, all computer matching
agreements involving personal records
contained in systems of records
maintained by the DoD Components.
(ii) Reviews and approves all
computer matching agreements between
the DoD and other federal, state, or local
governmental agencies, as well as any
memorandums of understanding, when
the match is internal to the DoD. This
review ensures that, in accordance with
5 U.S.C. 552a, OMB Circular No. A–130,
and this part, appropriate procedural
and due process requirements are
established before engaging in computer
matching activities.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: January 21, 2015.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2015–01262 Filed 1–26–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
48 CFR Parts 1523 and 1552
[EPA–HQ–OARM–2014–0515; FRL–9916–
21–OARM]
Environmental Protection Agency
Acquisition Regulation (EPAAR);
Environmental, Conservation,
Occupational Safety, and Drug-Free
Workplace
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) amends the EPA
Acquisition Regulation (EPAAR) to
address minor non-substantive changes
in three clauses and two related
prescriptions. The direct final rule
updates ‘‘Protection of Human
Subjects’’, ‘‘Care of Laboratory
Animals’’, and ‘‘EPA Green Meetings
and Conferences’’. EPA does not
anticipate any adverse comments.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 17 (Tuesday, January 27, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4201-4211]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01262]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 310
[Docket ID: DOD-2013-OS-0023]
RIN 0790-AJ03
DoD Privacy Program
AGENCY: Deputy Chief Management Officer, DoD.
ACTION: Final rule; amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule updates the established policies, guidance, and
assigned responsibilities of the DoD Privacy Program pursuant to The
Privacy Act and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-
130; authorizes the Defense Privacy Board and the Defense Data
Integrity Board; prescribes uniform procedures for implementation of
and compliance with the DoD Privacy Program; and delegates authorities
and responsibilities for the effective administration of the DoD
Privacy Program.
This rule is part of DoD's retrospective plan, completed in August
2011, under Executive Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review.'' DoD's full plan and updates can be accessed at:
https://exchange.regulations.gov/exchange/topic/eo-13563.
DATES: This rule is effective February 26, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Samuel P. Jenkins, 703-571-0070.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
I. Purpose of the Regulatory Action
a. The need for the regulatory action and how the action will meet
that need.
An individual's privacy is a fundamental legal right that must be
respected and protected. This regulatory action ensures that DoD's need
to collect, use, maintain, or disseminate personally identifiable
information (PII) about individuals for purposes of discharging its
statutory responsibilities will be balanced against their right to be
protected against unwarranted privacy invasions. This regulatory action
also describes the rules of conduct and responsibilities of DoD
personnel, DoD contractors, and DoD contractor personnel to ensure that
any PII contained in a system of records that they access and use to
conduct official business will be protected so that the security and
confidentiality of the information is preserved.
b. Succinct statement of legal authority for the regulatory action
(explaining, in brief, the legal authority laid out later in the
preamble).
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a, The Privacy Act of 1974, as amended,
which requires the implementation of the Act by Federal agencies.
II. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Regulatory Action in
Question
This rule:
a. Establishes rules of conduct for DoD personnel and DoD
contractors involved in the design, development, operation, or
maintenance of any system of records.
b. Establishes appropriate administrative, technical, and physical
safeguards to ensure the security and confidentiality of records and to
protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to their security or
integrity that could result in substantial harm, embarrassment,
inconvenience, or unfairness to any individual about whom information
is maintained.
c. Ensures that guidance, assistance, and subject matter expert
support are provided to the combatant command
[[Page 4202]]
privacy officers in the implementation and execution of and compliance
with the DoD Privacy Program.
d. Ensures that laws, policies, procedures, and systems for
protecting individual privacy rights are implemented throughout DoD.
III. Costs and Benefits
This regulatory action imposes no monetary costs to the Agency or
public. The benefit to the public is the accurate reflection of the
Agency's Privacy Program to ensure that policies and procedures are
known to the public.
Public Comments
The Department published a proposed rule on August 22, 2013 (78 FR
52117), with a request for comments. The following comments were
received and are addressed below:
Comment 1: An argument against the elimination of the term (and
position/role) ``System Manager''. Yes, it is every employee's
responsibility to ensure PII is properly handled, but the System
Manager is the `control valve' for each specific SOR and should
continue to have a big say in determining `who' should have access to
sensitive material. Much like the world of classified information,
being trained and having the `clearance' to access the information is
only part of the equation . . . the concept of ``need-to-know'' is
equally important when determining access, and the System Manager is
the POC that checks ``need-to-know''. In addition, the System Manager
knows (or should know) which SORN authorizes the collection of their
SOR, they know with whom the info can be shared, they know what should
be in the SOR and they verify that info every year, they keep track of
disclosure accounting, etc. The average user with access only knows to
protect it, and they wouldn't know a SORN if they tripped over it. I
would suggest returning the ``System Manager'' to this document.
DoD Response: This Comment addresses the Rules of Conduct as
described under 32 CFR 310.8(b)(1)-(3). These particular requirements
have been revised and incorporated into 32 CFR 310.8(j)-(l), and are
now applicable to all DoD personnel and DoD contractor personnel,
including system mangers. This revision does not eliminate the
position/role of system managers.
Comment 2: 32 CFR 310.22. This comment is targeted to a part of 32
CFR part 310 that DoD saw fit to not update, and it is a missed
opportunity to clarify current DoD practices. The DoD has gone out of
its way to establish that sharing lists of PII with non-DoD requestors
is prohibited by FOIA. The DoD has requested that OPM not share DoD
personnel information with requestors, and OPM has approved that
request. DoD has gone to court (supporting OPM), and won, in its effort
to ensure that requests for personnel information of DoD employees is
exempt under the FOIA. (see Long v. OPM (Case 5:05-cv-01522-NAM-DEP)).
And while the DPCLD continues to state that ``there is no DoD FOIA
policy denying the release of names of DoD personnel below the
Director, O-7, or SES levels. All such decisions to deny names that do
not comprise a list must be made by using the Reporters Committee
balancing test.'', in fact DoD has issued a policy memorandum (09 Nov
2001) stating exactly that.
Sidebarring whether it is ``actual'' DoD policy to withhold or not,
I think it is fair to say that DoD will likely discourage or prevent
release of personnel information (either in lists per the Nov. 2001
memo or not-in-lists via FOIA exemptions). Therefore the contention
expressed in 32 CFR 310.22(b)(5)(i)(A) that ``. . . personal
information regarding DoD civilian employees that normally may be
released without a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy''
is misleading and disingenuous and should be reworded. As presently
constituted, this wording gives the impression that this info is
normally released, so either some DoD commands may release it without
being aware that DoD, in practice, does exactly the opposite, or some
citizens wishing to know how their government works may actually think
they have a chance of getting that info from DoD without a court fight.
If the policy memo written just after 9/11 is indeed the new
permanent policy and not, as Michael Donley declared, that ``it was
believed that this would only be a temporary policy'', please change
the CFR to reflect that. 12 years of relying on a scrap of paper
touting a `temporary policy' and not changing Federal Regulations seems
to be circumventing the purpose of the CFR.
DoD Response: This Comment addresses the release of ``personal
information that is normally releasable'' as described in 32 CFR
310.22(b)(5)(i)(A). The commentator objects to the wording ``personally
information regarding DoD civilian employees that normally may be
released without a clear unwarranted invasion of personal privacy,'' as
``misleading and disingenuous.'' Attention should be drawn to the use
of the word ``may,'' as in indicator that it is permissible to release
this information, but not required.
Comment 3: 32 CFR 310.4(h). The amendment to the definition of DoD
Personnel should also include ``dependents of members of armed services
registered in DEERS.'' Military dependents receive no protection under
both the current and proposed versions of the Privacy Program. Aside
from ongoing military operations, military dependents are just as
likely to depend upon DoD services requiring the use of PII and/or PHI,
but are afforded no protections.
Currently, family members are only required to receive notice of
PII spillage, but are not afforded any civil remedies, nor is their
information protected by criminal action against its malicious use. See
DoD 5400.11-R, sec. C10.6.1.2.2. The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA)
also severely limits any torts arising out of PII spillage by parties
to whom the Privacy Program applies. See 28 U.S.C. 2680(h). For
military dependents stationed overseas, who are more likely to use
federal contractor services and in so doing, place their confidential
information in someone else's care, the FTCA might preclude any
protections at tort law for military families whatsoever. See 28 U.S.C.
2860(k).
Protecting DEERS dependent information has the added benefits of
enhancing national security, providing accountability for dependents'
records, and increasing oversight over DoD dependents' data by
government contractors. Protecting dependents' privacy enhances
national security by preventing another avenue by which malicious
actors can exploit service members. During a service member's
deployment, DoD dependents on the homefront frequently contact family
readiness groups and other on-base agencies for news on their military
members, provide information to DoD agencies to qualify for benefits,
and join military unit sponsored clubs to relieve the stress of their
loved one's absence. While information on the military member would be
protected under the Privacy Program, the DoD dependent's information
would not be. Thus, a malicious actor could legally request information
about a service member's family and use it to exploit a service
member's actions in a forward area, or illegally gain it by hacking
information that is currently not required to be protected.
Adding this definition also creates accountability for DEERS
dependent records. DoD dependents often become highly involved in on-
base activities that require sharing private information.
[[Page 4203]]
When that DoD dependent changes duty stations with their DoD member,
there is no accounting for the disposition of the records the DEERS
member left behind. On-base agencies are often the same from one base
to the next. A Privacy Program mandated recordkeeping program would
allow for more easier integrations of service members and their
families from one duty location to the next, by allowing a
standardization of the sharing and safekeeping of records between
``franchises'' at different bases. This in turn allows service members
to more rapidly begin work at a new duty station.
Admittedly, such an amendment possibly triggers an economic impact
analysis under E.O. 12866, and an unfunded mandates analysis under the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, due to the increase in costs in archiving
additional data and requiring contractor compliance.
However, the benefit to the welfare of our armed services, the
eventual elimination of replication of efforts in data collection at
different bases, and the savings to DoD family members' lost time and
wages in fighting possible identity theft due to PII spillage, will
outweigh the burden of such an amendment.
DoD Response: This Comment addresses the classification of DoD
Personnel in 32 CFR 310.4(h) and suggests the inclusion of ``dependents
of members of the armed services registered in DEERS'' in this
classification. Although military dependents do carry many of the same
attributes of military service members, they are not DoD employees and
therefore cannot be classified as ``DoD Personnel.'' The commentator
also suggests that military dependents ``are afforded no protections''
under the Privacy Program. Information concerning dependents of members
of the armed services registered in DEERS is maintained by DoD in
accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, which does provide
protection to military dependents. Within the DoD Privacy Program,
``family members'' are specifically mentioned in 32 CFR 310.14(a)(1)
and 32 CFR 310.50(a)(2)(ii) with respect to breach notification and
Privacy Act violations.
Comment 4: The Brennan Center is a nonpartisan law and policy
institute that seeks to improve our systems of democracy and justice.
The Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program works to
further national security policies that respect constitutional values
and the rule of law while protecting our people. Specifically, the
Center seeks to restore the proper flow of information between the
government and the people, ensure that domestic counterterrorism
policies effectively target the terrorist threat, and secure
appropriate mechanisms for oversight and accountability.
The Brennan Center recently published a report, What the Government
Does with Americans' Data, that explores the federal government's
retention of non-criminal information about Americans. The report
recommends specific reforms, including reforms to the Privacy Act and
limits on the retention of information reflecting the exercise of
rights protected by the First Amendment.
With respect to the DoD proposed regulation, we note that a
coalition of organizations is submitting a letter urging the DoD to
require the National Security Agency, a component of the DoD, to
publish System of Records Notices for three NSA databases: (1) A system
containing ``telephone numbers and electronic communications accounts/
addresses/identifiers that NSA has reason to believe are being used by
United States persons,'' used to distinguish U.S. persons from
foreigners in the source of targeting persons for the purpose of
surveillance under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act; (2) a database of email address lists and instant messaging
``buddy lists'' belonging to U.S. citizens and residents; and (3) a
database with information about social networks, including data
relating to U.S. persons. We endorse this recommendation, and believe
it is critically important that the NSA comply with its obligations to
provide the notices required by the Privacy Act regarding searchable
databases containing information about Americans and legal residents.
DoD Response: This Comment addresses System of Records Notices
(SORNs) with respect to the DoD, and with the National Security Agency
(NSA) in particular. It is DoD policy to ``publish in the Federal
Register upon establishment or revision a notice of the existence and
character of the system of records . . .'' 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4). A SORN
is required when (1) information about an individual is collected and
stored by a DoD Component; and (2) that information is retrievable by a
unique personal identifier. 32 CFR 310.10. NSA has twenty-five active
SORNS that are publicly available for review. NSA generates SORNs as
require by the Privacy Act of 1974 and applicable DoD regulation, 32
CFR 310.10. One NSA SORN, GNSA 18, concerns NSA ``collection of
operations records.'' GNSA 18 covers all individuals, as that term is
defined within the Privacy Act to encompass citizens of the United
States and lawful permanent residents. The purpose of GNSA 18 is to
allow NSA to maintain, as that term is defined by the Privacy Act,
records on foreign intelligence, counterintelligence, and information
systems security matters relating to the missions of NSA. Specifically,
GNSA 18 covers all individuals, as that term is defined by the Privacy
Act, who are identified in NSA foreign intelligence,
counterintelligence, or information system security reports, including
supportive materials. As such, the DoD Privacy Program complies with
the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, and as codified at 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Comment 5: The Policy section of the DoD's Privacy Program
currently states that ``No record shall be maintained on how an
individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment to the
constitution. . . .'' There are three enumerated exceptions: When
retention is authorized by statute, where the individual has authorized
it, or ``when the record is pertinent to and within the scope of an
authorized law enforcement activity.'' Under the proposed rule, the
analogous section would expand the third exception to allow information
relating to First Amendment-protected speech to be maintained when the
records is ``pertinent to and within the scope of an authorized
intelligence or administrative investigation.'' (This same change is
reflected in the proposed changes to the Privacy Program's Rules of
Conduct as well.)
This exception--both as it stands and as revised--is simultaneously
overly broad and vague. To begin with, it is not clear what matters are
encompassed by ``law enforcement activities''; it seems likely that
those activities could include more than an authorized investigation,
but it is unknown what other actions might qualify as an ``activity''
and thus trigger the ability to maintain First Amendment-protected
information. The new terms are even more ambiguous. ``Intelligence
activities'' are not defined, and the meaning of ``administrative
activities'' is particularly uncertain; it appears susceptible to being
used as a catch-all to permit the retention of First Amendment-
protected information in almost any circumstances.
Furthermore, the requirement that the record be ``pertinent to and
within the scope of'' one of the above matters is an extremely low
standard, as nearly any record could be found to be ``pertinent to'' a
particular activity. This is particularly true in light of the
assertions by the NSA and the DOJ that databases containing nearly all
[[Page 4204]]
American's phone records are ``relevant'' to the NSA's activities
because some minute percentage may be germane in the future. A higher
standard would be the ``relevant and necessary'' standard, which is
reflected in a proposed change to the Rules of Conduct requiring all
users to ``minimize the collection of [personally identifiable
information] to that which is relevant and necessary to accomplish a
purpose of the DoD.''
In short, the exception as proposed would allow First Amendment-
related information to remain in an individual's file under almost any
circumstances, as long as there is a colorable argument that it is
related in some way, or might be related in the future, to some law
enforcement, intelligence, or ``administrative'' matter. Because of the
ambiguity of these terms, American citizens are left with little
guidance about the actual circumstances under which information about
their protected speech or associations may be maintained in DoD files.
Accordingly, we urge the DoD to reject the proposed changes and to
significantly narrow this exception. Appropriate steps would include:
(1) Adding definitions for ``law enforcement activities,''
``intelligence activities,'' and ``administrative activities to 32 CFR
310.4, Definitions; (2) Limiting the retention of information
reflecting the exercise of First Amendment-protected rights to
circumstances in which it is relevant and necessary to an authorized
investigation; (3) Ensuring that at the close of any investigation,
First Amendment-protected information is purged. (All information
gathered about U.S. persons should be purged if no reasonable suspicion
of criminal activity is developed.) If this information must be
retained as part of an investigative file that is reasonably maintained
in the ordinary course of business, it should be masked to ensure that
it is accessible in the future only if strictly relevant and necessary
to another authorized investigation; and (4) Specifying the
circumstances under which any PII about Americans, including records
reflecting First Amendment-protected activities, may be shared with
other local, state, or federal agencies, foreign governments, or
private parties or entities.
DoD Response: This Comment addresses the terms ``law enforcement
activities,'' ``intelligence activities,'' and ``administrative
activities,'' and raises First Amendment concerns. The proposed
revision to the DoD policy includes that ``no record will be maintained
on how an individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment
. . . , except (1) when expressly authorized by statute; (2) when
expressly authorized by the individual that the record is about; or (3)
when the record is pertinent to and within the scope of an authorized
law enforcement activity, including an authorized intelligence or
administrative investigation.'' 32 CFR 310.5(f) (proposed). The Privacy
Act of 1974 permits ``exception from such requirements with respect to
records provided in this Act only in those cases where there is an
important public policy need for such exemption as has been determined
by specific statutory authority.'' Public Law 93-579, Section 2(b)(5).
General and Specific Exemptions are provided in 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) and
(k). As such, the DoD Privacy Program complies with the Privacy Act of
1974, as amended, and as codified at 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Comment 6: By notice published August 22, 2013, the Department of
Defense (``DoD'') proposes to amend its Privacy Program implementing
the Privacy Act of 1974. Specifically, DoD proposes to change its
``policies, guidance, and assigned responsibilities of the DoD Privacy
Program . . . ; authoriz[e] the Defense Privacy Board and the Defense
Data Integrity Board; prescrib[e] uniform procedures for implementation
of and compliance with the DoD Privacy Program; and delegat[e]
authorities and responsibilities for the effective administrative of
the DoD Privacy Program.''
The proposed amendments apply to all organizational entities within
the DoD, including the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Military
Departments, and the DoD Office of the Inspector General, which the DoD
refers to collectively as the ``DoD Components.'' The National Security
Agency (``NSA'') is an organizational entity and agency component
within the DoD. Therefore, the DoD's proposal applies to the NSA.
As discussed below, NSA currently maintains at least three unlawful
Privacy Act systems of records pertaining to US citizens and permanent
residents. These systems of records violate both the Privacy Act and
current DoD Privacy Program regulations. Accordingly, pursuant to DoD's
notice of proposed rulemaking (``NPRM''), the undersigned privacy,
consumer rights, and civil rights organizations [hereinafter ``Privacy
Commentators''] hereby submit these comments to urge DoD to enjoin the
NSA--a DoD component subject to the DoD Privacy Program--from violating
the Privacy Act and current DoD Privacy Program regulations.
Although the DoD's Privacy Program NPRM is generally favorable to
individual privacy and First Amendment rights and adheres to the
Privacy Act, the NSA's current collection, maintenance, and disclosure
of records violate the Privacy Act and current DoD Privacy Program
regulations. The NSA's activity would also violate DoD's proposal.
Because the NSA is under the purview of the DoD Privacy Program,
the DoD must ensure NSA implements ``information privacy protections,
including full compliance with federal laws, regulations, and policies
relating to information privacy'' before issuing a final rule.
Specifically, the DoD must ensure that the NSA complies with the
Privacy Act by publishing additional system of records notices and
otherwise adhering to the Privacy Act.
I. The Privacy Act Grants Individuals Judicially Enforceable Rights and
Imposes Obligations on Federal Agencies
The Privacy Act of 1974 governs federal agency maintenance,
collection, use, and dissemination of U.S. citizen and lawful permanent
resident ``records'' contained in a ``system of records.'' The Act
broadly defines ``record'' to include: Any item, collection, or
grouping of information about an individual that is maintained by an
agency, including, but not limited to, his education, financial
transactions, medical history, and criminal or employment history and
that contains his name, or the identifying number, symbol, or other
identifying particular assigned to the individual, such as a finger or
voice print or a photograph[.]
A ``system of records'' is: A group of any records under the
control of any agency from which information is retrieved by the name
of the individual or by some identifying number, symbol, or other
identifying particular assigned to the individual[.]
When it enacted the Privacy Act of 1974, Congress sought to
restrict the amount of personal information that federal agencies could
collect and required transparency in agency information practices.
Privacy Act legislative history reveals that the Act is intended ``to
promote accountability, responsibility, legislative oversight, and open
government with respect to the use of computer technology in the
personal information systems data of the Federal Government [.]'' The
Act is also intended to guard the privacy interests of citizens and
lawful permanent residents against government intrusion.
[[Page 4205]]
Congress found that ``the privacy of an individual is directly affected
by the collection, maintenance, use, and dissemination of personal
information by Federal agencies,'' and recognized that ``the right to
privacy is a personal and fundamental right to protected by the
Constitution of the United States.'' Congress thus sought to ``provide
certain protections for an individual against an invasion of personal
privacy'' by establishing a set of procedural and substantive rights
These rights, for example, guarantee that individuals:
May request access to records an agency maintains about
him or her, as well as have copies made;
may amend a record about him or her; and
must be informed whom the agency asks to supply
information;
Importantly, the Privacy Act grants individuals a private right of
action and individuals may sue federal agencies for violating the
Privacy Act.
In addition to granting individual rights, the Privacy Act also
imposes several obligations on federal agencies, including obligations
that agencies must:
At least 30 days prior to publication of each record
routine, ``publish in the Federal Register notice of any new use or
intended use of the information in the system, and provide an
opportunity for interested persons to submit written data, views, or
arguments to the agency'';
not maintain records ``describing how any individual
exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment unless expressly
authorized by statute or by the individual about whom the record is
maintained or unless pertinent to and within the scope of an authorized
law enforcement activity'';
give individuals access to the accounting of disclosure of
their records;
make notes of requested amendments within the records;
collect records ``about an individual as is relevant and
necessary to accomplish a purpose of the agency required to be
accomplished by statute or by executive order of the President'';
``collect information to the greatest extent practicable
directly from the subject individual when the information may result in
adverse determinations about an individual's rights, benefits, and
privileges under Federal programs'';
assure that all records used by the agency in making
determinations about an individual are accurate, relevant, timely and
complete as reasonably necessary to maintain fairness;
make a reasonable effort to notify an individual when a
record about him or her is made available to another individual when it
is a matter of public record;
promulgate rules establishing procedures that notify an
individual in response to record requests pertaining to him or her,
including ``reasonable times, places, and requirements for identifying
an individual'', institute disclosure procedures for medical and
psychological records, create procedures to review amendment requests,
as well as determine the request, the status of appeals to denial of
requests, and establish fees for record duplication, excluding the cost
for search and review of the record;
In addition to assessing ``reasonable attorney fees and other
litigation costs'' for noncompliant agencies, courts may order agencies
to amend individuals records, as well as ``enjoin the agency from
withholding records.'' The Act also imposes criminal penalties for
officers and agency employees who willfully disclose agency records in
violation of the Privacy Act or Privacy Act regulations.
II. NSA Record Maintenance, Collection, Use, and Dissemination Are
Subject to the Privacy Act and DoD Privacy Program Regulations
The NSA is an ``agency'' as defined in the Privacy Act. The NSA is
also a DoD organizational entity within the DoD. Accordingly, NSA is
subject to the Privacy Act, current DoD Privacy Program regulations,
and the NPRM. Pursuant to the Privacy Act and DoD Privacy Program
regulations, the NSA has published twenty-six systems of records. These
are as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Identifier Notices Exemptions claimed
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preamble:
GNSA 02...................... NSA/CSS Applicants (June (k)(1) and (k)(5).
5, 2008, 73 FR 31997).
GNSA 03...................... NSA/CSS Correspondence, (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(4), (k)(5).
Cases, Complaints,
Visitors, Requests
(February 22, 1993, 58
FR 10531).
GNSA 05...................... NSA/CSS Equal Employment (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(4).
Opportunity Data
Statistical Data
(December 30, 2008, 73
FR 79851).
GNSA 06...................... NSA/CSS Health, Medical (k)(1), (k)(4), (k)(5), (k)(6).
and Safety Files (March
15, 2012, 77 FR 15360).
GNSA 07...................... NSA/CSS Motor Vehicles (k)(1).
and Carpools (July 25,
2008, 73 FR 43411).
GNSA 08...................... NSA/CSS Payroll (k)(1) and (k)(2).
Processing File (October
3, 2012, 77 FR 60401).
GNSA 09...................... NSA/CSS Personnel File (k)(1), (k)(4), (k)(5), (k)(6).
(December 30, 2011, 76
FR 82283).
GNSA 10...................... NSA/CSS Personnel (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(5), (k)(6).
Security File (June 16,
2009, 74 FR 28483).
GNSA 11...................... NSA/CSS Key (k)(2).
Accountability Records
(June 28, 2010, 75 FR
36642).
GNSA 12...................... NSA/CSS Education, (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(5), (k)(6).
Training and Workforce
Development (March 24,
2009, 74 FR 12116).
GNSA 14...................... NSA/CSS Library Patron (k)(1) and (k)(4).
File Control System
(July 30, 2013, 78 FR
45913).
GNSA 15...................... NSA/CSS Computer Users (k)(1) and (k)(2).
Control System (February
5, 2010, 75 FR 6000).
GNSA 16...................... NSA/CSS Drug Testing
Program (September 22,
2011, 76 FR 58787).
GNSA 17...................... NSA/CSS Employee (j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(4), and (k)(5).
Assistance Service Case
Records (November 14,
2011, 76 FR 70427).
GNSA 18...................... Operations Records (k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(5).
(November 30, 2010, 75
FR 74019)..
GNSA 19...................... NSA/CSS Child Development
Services (December 4,
2009, 74 FR 63732).
GNSA 20...................... NSA Police Operational (k)(2), (k)(4), and (k)(5).
Files (April 23, 2010,
75 FR 21250).
GNSA 21...................... NSA/CSS Morale, Welfare,
and Recreation (MWR) and
Non-appropriated Fund
Instrumentality (NAFI)
Files (May 7, 2010, 75
FR 25215).
GNSA 22...................... Garnishment Processing
Files, (October 25,
2010, 75 FR 65457).
GNSA 24...................... NSA/CSS Pre-Publication
Review Records
(September 15, 2010, 75
FR 56079).
GNSA 25...................... NSA/CSS Travel Records (k)(2), (k)(4).
(September 13, 2012, 77
FR 56626).
GNSA 26...................... NSA/CSS Accounts (k)(4).
Receivable, Indebtedness
and Claims ( August 19,
2009, 74 FR 41872).
GNSA 27...................... Information Assurance
Scholarship Program
(October 5, 2011, 76 FR
61679).
[[Page 4206]]
GNSA 28...................... Freedom of Information (k)(1) through (k)(7).
Act, Privacy Act and
Mandatory
Declassification Review
Records (January 19,
2011, 76 FR 3098).
GNSA 29...................... NSA/CSS Office of (j)(2),(k)(2), (k)(5).
Inspector General
Investigations and
Complaints (May 3, 2012,
77 FR 26254).
GNSA 30...................... Congressional, Executive,
and Political Inquiry
Records (September 13,
2012, 77 FR 56628).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. NSA's Maintenance, Collection, Use, and Dissemination of Records
From Unpublished System of Records Violate the Privacy Act and DoD
Privacy Program Regulations
Recent Administration admissions and NSA documents reveal that over
the last several years, NSA has maintained at least three unpublished
system of records that allow the agency to retrieve information by
``identifying number[s], symbol[s], or other identifying particular[s]
assigned to . . . individual[s].'' These groups of records violate the
Privacy Act and DoD Privacy Program regulations because they were
collected without individual consent, public notice, and other Privacy
Act procedural requirements.
The first unlawful NSA system of records contains ``telephone
numbers and electronic communications accounts/addresses/identifiers
that NSA has reason to believe are being used by United States
persons.'' The NSA uses these ``identifying numbers, symbols, and other
particulars'' to retrieve information to identify if an individual whom
the NSA intends to monitor is a U.S. person.
The second unlawful NSA system of records is comprised of contact
lists that the NSA retrieves from email address books and instant
message ``buddy lists.'' In this system of records, the NSA gathers
email contact lists and instant message buddy lists that traverse
global data links. The contact lists and buddy lists include those
belonging to U.S. citizens. The lists are maintained within a
searchable contact list database that permits the NSA to retrieve
information by an ``identifying number, symbol, or other identifying
particular,''--i.e., email addresses and instant message accounts.
Furthermore, email contact lists, in particular, can contain other
identifying information beyond the email address of the contact, such
as name, address, business association, and relationship to the
contact.
The third unlawful NSA system of records is a database containing
information relating to social networks. Within this system of records,
the NSA maintains information on social connections (e.g. associates or
travel companions), location information, email addresses, phone
numbers, and publicly available information from commercial entities,
as well as location at certain times among other personal information.
The NSA retrieves information in this system of records to perform
social network analysis. General Keith Alexander confirmed the social
networking analysis, stating that the Supplemental Procedures allow the
NSA ``to use metadata that [it has] acquired under Executive Order 12-
333 and chain, whether it's phone records or emails, it through U.S.
selectors to figure out social networks abroad.'' General Alexander
confirmed that the 2009 Supplemental Procedures are still being used.
All three of the aforementioned NSA systems of records violate the
Privacy Act and DoD Privacy Program regulations because the NSA has
failed to publish system of records notices for each of the system of
records. None of the NSA's twenty-six published SORNs listed above
describes the type of data collection or dissemination that the NSA is
conducting with these systems of records. Moreover, they violate the
Privacy Act and DoD Privacy Program regulations because the records
were collected without individual notice, consent, or other Privacy Act
rights.
Finally, each of the three unpublished systems of records maintains
records describing how individuals exercise their First Amendment
rights, including press freedoms, and the rights to freely associate
and assemble. The Privacy Act forbids agencies from maintaining these
types of records ``unless expressly authorized by statute or by the
individual about whom the record is maintained or unless pertinent to
and within the scope of an authorized law enforcement activity.'' In
addition to the aforementioned Privacy Act violations, the NSA has
violated and continues to violate the Privacy Act by maintaining
records describing how individuals exercise their First Amendment
rights.
Conclusion. The NSA is currently in violation of the Privacy Act
and DoD Privacy Program regulations. The DoD must ensure that the NSA
complies with the Privacy Act by publishing additional system of
records notices and otherwise adhering to the Privacy Act before it can
adopt its current proposal.
DoD Response: This Comment addresses System of Records Notices
(SORNs) with respect to the DoD, and with the National Security Agency
(NSA) in particular. It is DoD policy to ``publish in the Federal
Register upon establishment or revision a notice of the existence and
character of the system of records . . .'' 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4). A SORN
is required when (1) information about an individual is collected and
stored by a DoD Component; and (2) that information is retrievable by a
unique personal identifier. 32 CFR 310.10 NSA has twenty-five active
SORNS that are publicly available for review. NSA generates SORNs as
require by the Privacy Act of 1974 and applicable DoD regulation, 32
CFR 310.10. One NSA SORN, GNSA 18, concerns NSA ``collection of
operations records.'' GNSA 18 covers all individuals, as that term is
defined within the Privacy Act to encompass citizens of the United
States and lawful permanent residents. The purpose of GNSA 18 is to
allow NSA to maintain, as that term is defined by the Privacy Act,
records on foreign intelligence, counterintelligence, and information
systems security matters relating to the missions of NSA. Specifically,
GNSA 18 covers all individuals, as that term is defined by the Privacy
Act, who are identified in NSA foreign intelligence,
counterintelligence, or information system security reports, including
supportive materials. As such, the DoD Privacy Program complies with
the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, and as codified at 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Regulatory Procedures
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' and Executive
Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review''
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distribute impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs
[[Page 4207]]
and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule has been designated a ``substantive non-
significant regulatory action.''
Sec. 202, Public Law 104-4, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act''
It has been determined that 32 CFR part 310 does not contain a
Federal mandate that may result in expenditure by State, local and
tribal governments, in aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year.
Public Law 96-354, ``Regulatory Flexibility Act'' (5 U.S.C. 601)
It has been certified that 32 CFR part 310 is not subject to the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601) because it would not, if
promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities.
Public Law 96-511, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been determined that 32 CFR part 310 does not impose
reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995.
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism''
It has been determined that 32 CFR part 310 does not have
federalism implications, as set forth in Executive Order 13132. This
rule does not have substantial direct effects on:
(1) The States;
(2) The relationship between the National Government and the
States; or
(3) The distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of Government.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 310
Privacy.
Accordingly 32 CFR part 310 is amended as follows:
PART 310--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 310 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Subpart A--[Amended]
0
2. Section 310.2 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 310.2 Purpose.
This part:
(a) Updates the established policies and assigned responsibilities
of the DoD Privacy Program pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a (also known and
referred to in this part as ``The Privacy Act'') and Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-130.
(b) Authorizes the Defense Privacy Board and the Defense Data
Integrity Board.
(c) Prescribes uniform procedures for implementation of and
compliance with the DoD Privacy Program.
(d) Delegates authorities and responsibilities for the effective
administration of the DoD Privacy Program.
0
3. Section 310.3 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 310.3 Applicability and scope.
(a) This part applies to the Office of the Secretary of Defense
(OSD), the Military Departments, the Office of the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Staff, the Combatant Commands, the
Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Defense, the
Defense Agencies, the DoD Field Activities, and all other
organizational entities within the DoD (referred to collectively in
this part as the ``DoD Components'').
(b) For the purposes of subsection (i), ``Criminal penalties,'' of
The Privacy Act, any DoD contractor and any employee of such a
contractor will be considered to be an employee of DoD when DoD
provides by a contract for the operation by or on behalf of DoD of a
system of records to accomplish a DoD function. DoD will, consistent
with its authority, cause the requirements of section (m) of The
Privacy Act to be applied to such systems.
0
4. Section 310.4 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 310.4 Definitions.
The following definitions apply to this part:
Access. The review of a record or a copy of a record or parts
thereof in a system of records by any individual.
Agency. For the purposes of disclosing records subject to the
Privacy Act among the DoD Components, the Department of Defense is
considered a single agency. For all other purposes to include requests
for access and amendment, denial of access or amendment, appeals from
denials, and record keeping as relating to release of records to non-
DoD Agencies, each DoD Component is considered an agency within the
meaning of the Privacy Act.
Breach. A loss of control, compromise, unauthorized disclosure,
unauthorized acquisition, unauthorized access, or any similar term
referring to situations where persons other than authorized users and
for an other than authorized purpose have access or potential access to
personally identifiable information (PII), whether physical or
electronic.
Computer matching. The computerized comparison of two or more
automated systems of records or a system of records with non-federal
records. Manual comparisons are not covered.
Confidential source. A person or organization who has furnished
information to the Federal Government under an express promise, if made
on or after September 27, 1975, that the person's or the organization's
identity shall be held in confidence or under an implied promise of
such confidentiality if this implied promise was made on or before
September 26, 1975.
Disclosure. The information sharing or transfer of any PII from a
system of records by any means of communication (such as oral, written,
electronic, mechanical, or actual review) to any person, government
agency, or private entity other than the subject of the record, the
subject's designated agent, or the subject's legal guardian.
DoD contractor. Any individual or other legal entity that:
(1) Directly or indirectly (e.g., through an affiliate) submits
offers for or is awarded, or reasonably may be expected to submit
offers for or be awarded, a government contract, including a contract
for carriage under government or commercial bills of lading, or a
subcontract under a government contract; or
(2) Conducts business, or reasonably may be expected to conduct
business, with the federal government as an agent or representative of
another contractor.
DoD personnel. Service members and federal civilian employees.
Federal benefit program. A program administered or funded by the
Federal Government, or by any agent or State on behalf of the Federal
Government, providing cash or in-kind assistance in the form of
payments, grants, loans, or loan guarantees to individuals.
Federal personnel. Officers and employees of the Government of the
United States, members of the uniformed services (including members of
the Reserve Components), individuals entitled to receive immediate or
deferred retirement benefits under any retirement program of the United
States (including survivor benefits).
Individual. A living person who is a U.S. citizen or an alien
lawfully admitted for permanent residence. The parent of a minor or the
legal guardian of any individual also may act on behalf of an
individual, except as otherwise provided in this part. Members of the
Military Services are ``individuals.'' Corporations, partnerships, sole
proprietorships, professional groups, businesses, whether incorporated
or
[[Page 4208]]
unincorporated, and other commercial entities are not ``individuals''
when acting in an entrepreneurial capacity with the DoD, but persons
employed by such organizations or entities are ``individuals'' when
acting in a personal capacity (e.g., security clearances, entitlement
to DoD privileges or benefits).
Individual access. Access to information pertaining to the
individual by the individual or his or her designated agent or legal
guardian.
Information sharing environment. Defined in Public Law 108-458,
``The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004''.
Lost, stolen, or compromised information. Actual or possible loss
of control, unauthorized disclosure, or unauthorized access of personal
information where persons other than authorized users gain access or
potential access to such information for an other than authorized
purpose where one or more individuals will be adversely affected. Such
incidents also are known as breaches.
Maintain. The collection, maintenance, use, or dissemination of
records contained in a system of records.
Member of the public. Any individual or party acting in a private
capacity to include Federal employees or military personnel.
Mixed system of records. Any system of records that contains
information about individuals as defined by the Privacy Act and non-
U.S. citizens and/or aliens not lawfully admitted for permanent
residence.
Non-Federal agency. Any state or local government, or agency
thereof, which receives records contained in a system of records from a
source agency for use in a computer matching program.
Official use. Within the context of this part, this term is used
when officials and employees of a DoD Component have a demonstrated a
need for the record or the information contained therein in the
performance of their official duties, subject to DoD 5200.1-R.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See footnote 1 to Sec. 310.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personally identifiable information (PII). Information used to
distinguish or trace an individual's identity, such as name, social
security number, date and place of birth, mother's maiden name,
biometric records, home phone numbers, other demographic, personnel,
medical, and financial information. PII includes any information that
is linked or linkable to a specified individual, alone, or when
combined with other personal or identifying information. For purposes
of this part, the term PII also includes personal information and
information in identifiable form.
Privacy Act request. A request from an individual for notification
as to the existence of, access to, or amendment of records pertaining
to that individual. These records must be maintained in a system of
records.
Protected health information (PHI). Defined in DoD 6025.18-R, ``DoD
Health Information Privacy Regulation'' (available at https://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/602518r.pdf).
Recipient agency. Any agency, or contractor thereof, receiving
records contained in a system of records from a source agency for use
in a computer matching program.
Record. Any item, collection, or grouping of information in any
media (e.g., paper, electronic), about an individual that is maintained
by a DoD Component, including, but not limited to, education, financial
transactions, medical history, criminal or employment history, and that
contains the name, or identifying number, symbol, or other identifying
particular assigned to the individual, such as a fingerprint, a voice
print, or a photograph.
Risk assessment. An analysis considering information sensitivity,
vulnerabilities, and cost in safeguarding personal information
processed or stored in the facility or activity.
Routine use. The disclosure of a record outside the Department of
Defense for a use that is compatible with the purpose for which the
information was collected and maintained by the Department of Defense.
The routine use must be included in the published system notice for the
system of records involved.
Source agency. Any agency which discloses records contained in a
system of records to be used in a computer matching program, or any
state or local government, or agency thereof, which discloses records
to be used in a computer matching program.
Statistical record. A record maintained only for statistical
research or reporting purposes and not used in whole or in part in
making determinations about specific individuals.
System of records. A group of records under the control of a DoD
Component from which PII is retrieved by the individual's name or by
some identifying number, symbol, or other identifying particular
uniquely assigned to an individual.
System of records notice (SORN). A notice published in the Federal
Register that constitutes official notification to the public of the
existence of a system of records.
0
5. Section 310.5 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 310.5 Policy.
It is DoD policy that:
(a) An individual's privacy is a fundamental legal right that must
be respected and protected.
(1) The DoD's need to collect, use, maintain, or disseminate (also
known and referred to in this part as ``maintain'') PII about
individuals for purposes of discharging its statutory responsibilities
will be balanced against their right to be protected against
unwarranted privacy invasions.
(2) The DoD protects individuals' rights, consistent with federal
laws, regulations, and policies, when maintaining their PII.
(3) DoD personnel and DoD contractors have an affirmative
responsibility to protect an individual's privacy when maintaining his
or her PII.
(4) Consistent with section 1016(d) of Public Law 108-458 and
section 1 of Executive Order 13388, ``Further Strengthening the Sharing
of Terrorism Information to Protect Americans'', the DoD will protect
information privacy and provide other protections relating to civil
liberties and legal rights in the development and use of the
information sharing environment.
(b) The DoD establishes rules of conduct for DoD personnel and DoD
contractors involved in the design, development, operation, or
maintenance of any system of records. DoD personnel and DoD contractors
will be trained with respect to such rules and the requirements of this
section and any other rules and procedures adopted pursuant to this
section and the penalties for noncompliance. The DoD Rules of Conduct
are established in Sec. 310.8.
(c) DoD personnel and DoD contractors conduct themselves consistent
with the established rules of conduct in Sec. 310.8, so that records
maintained in a system of records will only be maintained as authorized
by 5 U.S.C. 552a and this part.
(d) DoD legislative, regulatory, or other policy proposals will be
evaluated to ensure consistency with the information privacy
requirements of this part.
(e) Pursuant to The Privacy Act, no record will be maintained on
how an individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment to
the Constitution of the United States (referred to in this part as
``the First Amendment''), except:
[[Page 4209]]
(1) When specifically authorized by statute.
(2) When expressly authorized by the individual that the record is
about.
(3) When the record is pertinent to and within the scope of an
authorized law enforcement activity, including an authorized
intelligence or administrative investigation.
(f) Disclosure of records pertaining to an individual from a system
of records is prohibited except with his or her consent or as otherwise
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 552a and this part or 32 CFR part 286. When DoD
Components make such disclosures, the individual may, to the extent
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 552a and this part, obtain a description of such
disclosures from the Component concerned.
(g) Disclosure of records pertaining to personnel of the National
Security Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National
Reconnaissance Office, and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
is prohibited to the extent authorized by Public Law 86-36, ``National
Security Agency-Officers and Employees'' and 10 U.S.C. 424. Disclosure
of records pertaining to personnel of overseas, sensitive, or routinely
deployable units is prohibited to the extent authorized by 10 U.S.C.
130b.
(h) The DoD establishes appropriate administrative, technical, and
physical safeguards to ensure the security and confidentiality of
records and to protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to
their security or integrity that could result in substantial harm,
embarrassment, inconvenience, or unfairness to any individual about
whom information is maintained.
(i) Disclosure of PHI will be consistent with DoD 6025.18-R.
(j) All DoD personnel and DoD contractors will be provided training
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a and OMB Circular No. A-130.
(k) PII collected, used, maintained, or disseminated will be:
(1) Relevant and necessary to accomplish a lawful DoD purpose
required by statute or Executive Order.
(2) Collected to the greatest extent practicable directly from the
individual. He or she will be informed as to why the information is
being collected, the authority for collection, how it will be used,
whether disclosure is mandatory or voluntary, and the consequences of
not providing that information.
(3) Relevant, timely, complete, and accurate for its intended use.
(4) Protected using appropriate administrative, technical, and
physical safeguards based on the media (e.g., paper, electronic)
involved. Protection will ensure the security of the records and
prevent compromise or misuse during maintenance, including working at
authorized alternative worksites.
(l) Individuals are permitted, to the extent authorized by 5 U.S.C.
552a and this part, to:
(1) Upon request by an individual, gain access to records or to any
information pertaining to the individual which is contained in a system
of records.
(2) Obtain a copy of such records, in whole or in part.
(3) Correct or amend such records once it has been determined that
the records are not accurate, relevant, timely, or complete.
(4) Appeal a denial for a request to access or a request to amend a
record.
(m) Non-U.S. citizens and aliens not lawfully admitted for
permanent residence may request access to and amendment of records
pertaining to them; however, this part does not create or extend any
right pursuant to The Privacy Act to them.
(n) SORNs and notices of proposed or final rulemaking are published
in the Federal Register (FR), and reports are submitted to Congress and
OMB, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a, OMB Circular No. A-130, and this
part, Volume 1 of DoD Manual 8910.01, ``DoD Information Collections
Manual: Procedures for DoD Internal Information Collections''
(available at https://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/891001m_vol1.pdf), and DoD Instruction 5545.02, ``DoD Policy for
Congressional Authorization and Appropriations Reporting Requirements''
(available at https://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/554502p.pdf). Information about an individual maintained in a new
system of records will not be collected until the required SORN
publication and review requirements are satisfied.
(o) All DoD personnel must make reasonable efforts to inform an
individual, at their last known address, when any record about him or
her is disclosed:
(1) Due to a compulsory legal process.
(2) In a manner that will become a matter of public record.
(p) Individuals must be notified in a timely manner, consistent
with the requirements of this part, if there is a breach of their PII.
(q) At least 30 days prior to disclosure of information pursuant to
subparagraph (e)(4)(D) (routine uses) of The Privacy Act, the DoD will
publish an FR notice of any new use or intended use of the information
in the system, and provide an opportunity for interested people to
submit written data, views, or arguments to the agency.
(r) Computer matching programs between the DoD Components and
federal, state, or local governmental agencies are conducted in
accordance with the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 552a, OMB Circular No. A-
130, and this part.
(s) The DoD will publish in the FR notice any establishment or
revision of a matching program at least 30 days prior to conducting
such program of such establishment or revision if any DoD Component is
a recipient agency or a source agency in a matching program with a non-
federal agency.
0
6. Revise Sec. 310.6 to read as follows:
Sec. 310.6 Responsibilities.
(a) The Deputy Chief Management Officer of the Department of
Defense (DCMO):
(1) Serves as the Senior Agency Official for Privacy (SAOP) for the
DoD. These duties, in accordance with OMB Memorandum M-05-08,
``Designation of Senior Agency Officials for Privacy'' (available at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/omb/memoranda/fy2005/m05-08.pdf), include:
(i) Ensuring DoD implementation of information privacy protections,
including full compliance with federal laws, regulations, and policies
relating to information privacy.
(ii) Overseeing, coordinating, and facilitating DoD privacy
compliance efforts.
(iii) Ensuring that DoD personnel and DoD contractors receive
appropriate training and education programs regarding the information
privacy laws, regulations, policies, and procedures governing DoD-
specific procedures for handling of PII.
(2) Provides rules of conduct and policy for, and coordinates and
oversees administration of, the DoD Privacy Program to ensure
compliance with policies and procedures in 5 U.S.C. 552a and OMB
Circular No. A-130.
(3) Publishes this part and other guidance to ensure timely and
uniform implementation of the DoD Privacy Program.
(4) Serves as the chair of the Defense Privacy Board and the
Defense Data Integrity Board.
(5) As requested, ensures that guidance, assistance, and subject
matter expert support are provided to the Combatant Command privacy
officers in the implementation and execution of and compliance with the
DoD Privacy Program.
(6) Acts as The Privacy Act Access and Amendment appellate
authority for OSD and the Office of the Chairman of
[[Page 4210]]
the Joint Chiefs of Staff when an individual is denied access to or
amendment of records pursuant to The Privacy Act, DoD Directive
5105.53, ``Director of Administration and Management (DA&M)''
(available at https://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/510553p.pdf), and Deputy Secretary of Defense Memorandum,
``Reorganization of the Office of the Deputy Chief Management
Officer.''
(b) Under the authority, direction, and control of the DCMO,
through the Director for Oversight and Compliance, the Chief, Defense
Privacy and Civil Liberties Division (DPCLD):
(1) Ensures that laws, policies, procedures, and systems for
protecting individual privacy rights are implemented throughout DoD.
(2) Oversees and provides strategic direction for the DoD Privacy
Program.
(3) Assists the DCMO in performing the responsibilities in
paragraphs (a)(1)-(a)(6) of this section.
(4) Reviews DoD legislative, regulatory, and other policy proposals
that contain information on privacy issues relating to how the DoD
keeps its PII. These reviews must include any proposed legislation,
testimony, and comments having privacy implications in accordance with
DoD Directive 5500.01, ``Preparing, Processing, and Coordinating
Legislation, Executive Orders, Proclamations, Views Letters, and
Testimony'' (available at https://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/550001p.pdf).
(5) Reviews proposed new, altered, and amended systems of records.
Submits required SORNs for publication in the FR and, when required,
provides advance notification to OMB and Congress consistent with 5
U.S.C. 552a, OMB Circular No. A-130, and this part.
(6) Reviews proposed DoD Component privacy exemption rules. Submits
the exemption rules for publication in the FR, and submits reports to
OMB and Congress consistent with 5 U.S.C. 552a, OMB Circular No. A-130,
and this part.
(7) Develops, coordinates, and maintains all DoD computer matching
agreements. Submits required match notices for publication in the FR
and provides advance notification to OMB and Congress consistent with 5
U.S.C. 552a, OMB Circular No. A-130, and this part.
(8) Provides guidance, assistance, and support to the DoD
Components in their implementation of the DoD Privacy Program to ensure
that:
(i) All requirements developed to maintain PII conform to the DoD
Privacy Program standards.
(ii) Appropriate procedures and safeguards are developed and
implemented to protect PII when it is collected, used, maintained, or
disseminated in any media.
(iii) Specific procedures and safeguards are developed and
implemented when PII is collected and maintained for research purposes.
(9) Compiles data in support of the DoD Chief Information Officer
(DoD CIO) submission of the Federal Information Security Management Act
(FISMA) Privacy Reports, pursuant to OMB Memorandum M-06-15,
``Safeguarding Personally Identifiable Information'' (available at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/fy2006/m-06-15.pdf); the Biennial Matching Activity Report to OMB, in accordance
with OMB Circular No. A-130 and this part; the semiannual Section 803
report in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 2000ee and 2000ee-1; and other
reports as required.
(10) Reviews and coordinates on DoD Component privacy program
implementation rules to ensure they are in compliance with the DoD-
level guidance.
(11) Provides operational and administrative support to the Defense
Privacy Board and the Defense Data Integrity Board.
(c) The General Counsel of the Department of Defense (GC DoD):
(1) Provides advice and assistance on all legal matters related to
the administration of the DoD Privacy Program.
(2) Appoints a designee to serve as a member of the Defense Privacy
Board and the Defense Data Integrity Board.
(3) When a DoD Privacy Program group is created, appoints a
designee to serve as a member.
(d) The DoD Component heads:
(1) Provide adequate funding and personnel to establish and support
an effective DoD Privacy Program.
(2) Establish DoD Component-specific procedures in compliance with
this part and publish these procedures as well as rules of conduct in
the FR.
(3) Establish and implement appropriate administrative, physical,
and technical safeguards and procedures prescribed in this part and
other DoD Privacy Program guidance.
(4) Ensure Component compliance with supplemental guidance and
procedures in accordance with all applicable federal laws, regulations,
policies, and procedures.
(5) Appoint a Component senior official for privacy (CSOP) to
support the SAOP in carrying out the SAOP's duties identified in OMB
Memorandum M-05-08.
(6) Appoint a Component privacy officer to administer the DoD
Privacy Program, on behalf of the CSOP.
(7) Ensure DoD personnel and DoD contractors having primary
responsibility for implementing the DoD Privacy Program receive
appropriate privacy training. This training must be consistent with the
requirements of this part and will address the provisions of 5 U.S.C.
552a, OMB Circular No. A-130, and this part.
(8) Ensure that all DoD Component legislative, regulatory, or other
policy proposals are evaluated to ensure consistency with the
information privacy requirements of this part.
(9) Assess the impact of technology on the privacy of PII and, when
feasible, adopt privacy-enhancing technology to:
(i) Preserve and protect PII contained in a DoD Component system of
records.
(ii) Audit compliance with the requirements of this part.
(10) Ensure that officials who have specialized knowledge of the
DoD Privacy Program periodically review Component implementation of and
compliance with the DoD Privacy Program.
(11) Submit reports, consistent with the requirements of this part,
in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a and OMB Circular No. A-130, and as
otherwise directed by the Chief, DPCLD.
(e) In addition to the responsibilities in paragraph (d), the
Secretaries of the Military Departments provide program and financial
support to the Combatant Commands as identified in DoD Directive
5100.03, ``Support to the Headquarters of Combatant and Subordinate
Unified Commands'' (available at https://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/510003p.pdf) to fund, without reimbursement, the
administrative and logistic support required by combatant and
subordinate unified command headquarters to perform their assigned
missions effectively.
Sec. 310.7 [Removed and Reserved]
0
7. Section 310.7 is removed and reserved.
0
8. Section 310.8 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 310.8 Rules of conduct.
In accordance with section (e)(9) of The Privacy Act, this section
provides DoD rules of conduct for the development, operation, and
maintenance of systems of records. DoD personnel and DoD contractor
personnel will:
(a) Take action to ensure that any PII contained in a system of
records that they access and use to conduct official
[[Page 4211]]
business will be protected so that the security and confidentiality of
the information is preserved.
(b) Not disclose any PII contained in any system of records, except
as authorized by The Privacy Act, or other applicable statute,
Executive order, regulation, or policy. Those willfully making any
unlawful or unauthorized disclosure, knowing that disclosure is
prohibited, may be subject to criminal penalties and/or administrative
sanctions.
(c) Report any unauthorized disclosures of PII from a system of
records to the applicable Privacy point of contact (POC) for the
respective DoD Component.
(d) Report the maintenance of any system of records not authorized
by this part to the applicable Privacy POC for the respective DoD
Component.
(e) Minimize the collection of PII to that which is relevant and
necessary to accomplish a purpose of the DoD.
(f) Not maintain records describing how any individual exercises
rights guaranteed by the First Amendment, except:
(1) When specifically authorized by statute.
(2) When expressly authorized by the individual that the record is
about.
(3) When the record is pertinent to and within the scope of an
authorized law enforcement activity, including authorized intelligence
or administrative activities.
(g) Safeguard the privacy of all individuals and the
confidentiality of all PII.
(h) Limit the availability of records containing PII to DoD
personnel and DoD contractors who have a need to know in order to
perform their duties.
(i) Prohibit unlawful possession, collection, or disclosure of PII,
whether or not it is within a system of records.
(j) Ensure that all DoD personnel and DoD contractors who either
have access to a system of records or develop or supervise procedures
for handling records in a system of records are aware of their
responsibilities and are properly trained to safeguard PII being
maintained under the DoD Privacy Program.
(k) Prepare any required new, amended, or altered SORN for a given
system of records and submit the SORN through their DoD Component
Privacy POC to the Chief, DPCLD, for coordination and submission for
publication in the FR.
(l) Not maintain any official files on individuals, which are
retrieved by the name of the individual or by some identifying number,
symbol, or other identifying particular assigned to the individual,
also known as a system of records, without first ensuring that a notice
has been published in the FR. Any official who willfully maintains a
system of records without meeting the publication requirements as
prescribed by this part and The Privacy Act may be subject to criminal
penalties and/or administrative sanctions.
(m) Maintain all records in a mixed system of records as if all the
records in such a system are subject to The Privacy Act.
0
9. Amend Sec. 310.9 to revise paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 310.9 Privacy boards and office, composition and
responsibilities.
(a) The Defense Privacy Board--(1) Membership. The Board consists
of:
(i) Voting members. Representatives designated by the Secretaries
of the Military Departments and the following officials or their
designees:
(A) The DCMO, who serves as the chair.
(B) The Chief, DPCLD, who serves as the Executive Secretary and as
a member.
(C) The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness.
(D) The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs.
(E) The DoD CIO.
(F) The Director, Defense Manpower Data Center.
(G) The Director, Executive Services Directorate, Washington
Headquarters Services (WHS).
(H) The GC DoD.
(I) The Chief of the National Guard Bureau.
(ii) Non-voting members. Non-voting members are the Director,
Enterprise Information Technology Services Directorate (EITSD), WHS;
and the representatives designated by Defense Agency and DoD Field
Activity directors.
(2) Responsibilities. The Board:
(i) Serves as the primary DoD policy forum for matters involving
the DoD Privacy Program, meeting as necessary to address issues of
common concern to ensure that consistent policy is adopted and followed
by the DoD Components. The Board issues advisory opinions, as
necessary, on the DoD Privacy Program to promote uniform and consistent
application of 5 U.S.C. 552a, OMB Circular No. A-130, and this part.
(ii) Establishes and convenes committees as necessary.
(iii) Establishes working groups whose membership is composed of
DoD Component privacy officers and others as necessary.
(b) The Defense Data Integrity Board--(1) Membership. The Board
consists of:
(i) The DCMO, who serves as the chair.
(ii) The Chief, DPCLD, who serves as the Executive Secretary.
(iii) The representatives designated by the Secretaries of the
Military Departments; the DoD CIO; the GC DoD; the Inspector General of
the Department of Defense, who is a non-voting advisory member; the
Director, EITSD; and the Director, Defense Manpower Data Center.
(2) Responsibilities. The Board:
(i) Oversees and coordinates, consistent with the requirements of 5
U.S.C. 552a, OMB Circular No. A-130, and this part, all computer
matching agreements involving personal records contained in systems of
records maintained by the DoD Components.
(ii) Reviews and approves all computer matching agreements between
the DoD and other federal, state, or local governmental agencies, as
well as any memorandums of understanding, when the match is internal to
the DoD. This review ensures that, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a,
OMB Circular No. A-130, and this part, appropriate procedural and due
process requirements are established before engaging in computer
matching activities.
* * * * *
Dated: January 21, 2015.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2015-01262 Filed 1-26-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P