Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation, 31561-31563 [2016-11702]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 97 / Thursday, May 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules
significant conservation of energy. (42
U.S.C. 6317(a)(1))
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
II. Discussion
[Docket No. EERE–2010–BT–TP–0044]
RIN 1904–AC37
Energy Conservation Program: Test
Procedures for High-Intensity
Discharge Lamps; Withdrawal
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking;
withdrawal.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) withdraws its proposal for
establishing test procedures for highintensity discharge (HID) lamps in light
of the fact that DOE published a final
determination on December 9, 2015
concluding that energy conservation
standards for HID lamps are not
justified, thereby negating the need for
an HID test procedure.
DATES: The proposed rule published on
December 15, 2011 (76 FR 77914) and
updated on May 22, 2014 (79 FR 29632)
is withdrawn as of May 19, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms. Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Office, EE–2J, 1000
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 287–1604. Email:
high_intensity_dischage_lamps@
ee.doe.gov.
Ms. Francine Pinto, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (703) 887–7971. Email:
Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
I. Authority
Title III of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6291, et
seq.), Public Law 94–163, sets forth a
variety of provisions designed to
improve energy efficiency. Part C of title
III, which for editorial reasons was redesignated as Part A–1 upon
incorporation into the U.S. Code (42
U.S.C. 6311–6317), establishes the
‘‘Energy Conservation Program for
Certain Industrial Equipment,’’ a
program covering certain industrial
equipment, which include the HID
lamps that are the subject of this notice.
Pursuant to EPCA, DOE must prescribe
test procedures and energy conservation
standards for HID lamps for which DOE
has determined that standards would be
technologically feasible, economically
justified, and would result in a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:52 May 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
On December 15, 2011, DOE
published a Notice of Proposed
rulemaking to establish test procedures
for HID lamps under the Energy Policy
and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA).
76 FR 77914. Subsequently, on May 22,
2014, DOE published a Supplemental
Notice of Proposed rulemaking,
updating the earlier NOPR test
procedure. 79 FR 29632.
Today, DOE is withdrawing its test
procedure proposal because on
December 9, 2015 it published a final
determination that energy conservation
standards for HID lamps are not
justified, consequently negating the
need for an HID test procedure. 80 FR
76355.
III. Approval of the Office of the
Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved
publication of this withdrawal.
List of Subjects
10 CFR Part 429
Administrative practice and
procedure, Buildings and facilities,
Business and industry, Energy
conservation, Grants programs—energy,
Housing, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Technical assistance.
10 CFR Part 431
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation,
Household appliances, Imports,
Incorporation by reference, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Small
business.
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 13,
2016.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy.
[FR Doc. 2016–11912 Filed 5–18–16; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 310
[Docket ID: DoD–2016–OS–0059]
Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation
Office of the Secretary of
Defense, DoD.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
31561
The Office of the Secretary of
Defense proposes to exempt records
maintained in DUSDI 01–DoD
‘‘Department of Defense (DoD) Insider
Threat Management and Analysis
Center (DITMAC) and DoD Component
Insider Threat Records System,’’ from
subsections (c)(3) and (4); (d)(1), (2), (3),
and (4); (e)(1), (2), (3), (4)(G), (H), and
(I), (5), and (8); (f); and (g) of the Privacy
Act. A system of records notice for this
system has been published today in the
Federal Register.
In addition, in the course of carrying
out collections and analysis of
information in connection with the
operations of the DITMAC and DoD
Component insider threat programs,
exempt records received from other
systems of records may become part of
this system. To the extent that copies of
exempt records from those other
systems of records are maintained in
this system, the Department also claims
the same exemptions for the records
from those other systems that are
maintained in this system, as claimed
for the original primary system of which
they are a part.
DATES: In accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552a(e)(4) and (11), the public is given
a 30-day period in which to comment.
Therefore, please submit any comments
by June 20, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number and title,
by any of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Department of Defense,
Deputy Chief Management Officer,
Directorate for Oversight and
Compliance, 4800 Mark Center Drive,
ATTN: Box 24, Alexandria, VA 22350–
1700.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number for this Federal Register
document. The general policy for
comments and other submissions from
members of the public is to make these
submissions available for public
viewing on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Cindy Allard, Director of the Defense
Privacy, Civil Liberties, and
Transparency Division, 703–571–0070.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
DITMAC was established by the Under
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence in
order to consolidate and analyze insider
threat information reported by the DoD
Component insider threat programs
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\19MYP1.SGM
19MYP1
31562
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 97 / Thursday, May 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
mandated by Presidential Executive
Order 13587, issued October 7, 2011,
which required Federal agencies to
establish an insider threat detection and
prevention program to ensure the
security of classified networks and the
responsible sharing and safeguarding of
classified information consistent with
appropriate protections for privacy and
civil liberties. For purposes of this
system of records, the term ‘‘insider
threat’’ is defined in the Minimum
Standards for Executive Branch Insider
Threat Task Force based on direction
provided in Section 6.3(b) of Executive
Order 13587. The DITMAC helps
prevent, deter, detect, and/or mitigate
the potential threat that personnel,
including DoD military personnel,
civilian employees, and contractor
personnel, who have or had been
granted eligibility for access to classified
information or eligibility to hold a
sensitive position may harm the security
of the United States. This threat can
include damage to the United States
through espionage, terrorism,
unauthorized disclosure of national
security information, or through the loss
or degradation of departmental
resources or capabilities.
The system of records will be used to
analyze, monitor, and audit insider
threat information for insider threat
detection and mitigation within DoD on
threats that persons who have or had
been granted eligibility for access to
classified information or eligibility to
hold a sensitive positions may pose to
DoD and U.S. Government installations,
facilities, personnel, missions, or
resources. The system of records will
support the DITMAC and DoD
Component insider threat programs,
enable the identification of systemic
insider threat issues and challenges, and
provide a basis for the development and
recommendation of solutions to deter,
detect, and/or mitigate potential insider
threats. It will assist in identifying best
practices among other Federal
Government insider threat programs,
through the use of existing DoD
resources and functions and by
leveraging existing authorities, policies,
programs, systems, and architectures.
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ and Executive
Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation
and Regulatory Review’’
It has been determined that this rule
is not a significant rule. This rule does
not (1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy; a sector of the economy;
productivity; competition; jobs; the
environment; public health or safety; or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:52 May 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
State, local, or tribal governments or
communities; (2) Create a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by
another Agency; (3) Materially alter the
budgetary impact of entitlements,
grants, user fees, or loan programs, or
the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy
issues arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in these Executive orders.
Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory
Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C Chapter 6)
It has been certified that this rule does
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities
because it is concerned only with the
administration of Privacy Act systems of
records within DoD. A Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis is not required.
Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork
Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been determined that this rule
does not impose additional information
collection requirements on the public
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Section 202, Public Law 104–4,
‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’
It has been determined that this rule
does not involve a Federal mandate that
may result in the expenditure by State,
local and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100 million or more and that it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments.
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’
It has been determined that this rule
does not have federalism implications.
This rule does not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the National
Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 310
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 310 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 310 [Amended]
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR
part 310 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a.
§§ 310.30 through 310.53 [Redesignated as
§§ 310.31 through 310.54]
2. Redesignate § 310.30 through
§ 310.53 as § 310.31 through § 310.54.
■ 3. In Subpart F, add a new § 310.30 to
read as follows:
■
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
§ 310.30
DoD-wide exemptions.
(a) Use of DoD-wide exemptions. DoDwide exemptions for DOD-wide systems
of records are established pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 552a(j) and (k) of the Privacy Act.
(b) Promises of confidentiality. (1)
Only the identity of sources that have
been given an express promise of
confidentiality may be protected from
disclosure under paragraphs (d)(3)(i),
(ii), and (iii) and (d)(4) of this section.
However, the identity of sources who
were given implied promises of
confidentiality in inquiries conducted
before September 27, 1975, also may be
protected from disclosure.
(2) Ensure promises of confidentiality
are not automatically given but are used
sparingly. Establish appropriate
procedures and identify fully categories
of individuals who may make such
promises. Promises of confidentiality
shall be made only when they are
essential to obtain the information
sought (see 5 CFR part 736).
(c) Access to records for which DODwide exemptions are claimed. Deny the
individual access only to those portions
of the records for which the claimed
exemption applies.
(d) DoD-wide exemptions. The
following exemptions are applicable to
all components of the Department of
Defense for the following system(s) of
records:
(1) System identifier and name:
DUSDI 01–DoD ‘‘Department of Defense
(DoD) Insider Threat Management and
Analysis Center (DITMAC) and DoD
Component Insider Threat Records
System.’’ Exemption: This system of
records is exempted from subsections
(c)(3) and (4); (d)(1), (2), (3) and (4);
(e)(1), (2), (3), (4)(G)(H) and (I), (5) and
(8); and (g) of the Privacy Act pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) (2) and (k)(1), (2), (4),
(5), (6), and (7).
(2) Records are only exempt from
pertinent provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a to
the extent that such provisions have
been identified and an exemption
claimed for the record and the purposes
underlying the exemption for the record
pertain to the record.
(3) Exemption from the particular
subsections is justified for the following
reasons:
(i) Subsection (c)(3). To provide the
subject with an accounting of
disclosures of records in this system
could inform that individual of the
existence, nature, or scope of an actual
or potential law enforcement or
counterintelligence investigation, and
thereby seriously impede law
enforcement or counterintelligence
efforts by permitting the record subject
and other persons to whom he might
disclose the records to avoid criminal
E:\FR\FM\19MYP1.SGM
19MYP1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 97 / Thursday, May 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules
penalties, civil remedies, or
counterintelligence measures. Access to
the accounting of disclosures could also
interfere with a civil or administrative
action or investigation which may
impede in those actions or
investigations. Access also could reveal
the identity of confidential sources
incident to Federal employment,
military service, contract, and security
clearance determinations.
(ii) Subsection (c)(4). This subsection
is inapplicable to the extent that an
exemption is being claimed for
subsection (d).
(iii) Subsection (d)(1). Disclosure of
records in the system could reveal the
identity of confidential sources and
result in an unwarranted invasion of the
privacy of others. Disclosure may also
reveal information relating to actual or
potential criminal investigations.
Disclosure of classified national security
information would cause damage to the
national security of the United States.
Disclosure could also interfere with a
civil or administrative action or
investigation; reveal the identity of
confidential sources incident to Federal
employment, military service, contract,
and security clearance determinations;
and reveal the confidentiality and
integrity of Federal testing materials and
evaluation materials used for military
promotions when furnished by a
confidential source.
(iv) Subsection (d)(2). Amendment of
the records could interfere with ongoing
criminal or civil law enforcement
proceedings and impose an impossible
administrative burden by requiring
investigations to be continuously
reinvestigated.
(v) Subsections (d)(3) and (4). These
subsections are inapplicable to the
extent exemption is claimed from (d)(1)
and (2).
(vi) Subsection (e)(1). It is often
impossible to determine in advance if
investigatory records contained in this
system are accurate, relevant, timely
and complete, but, in the interests of
effective law enforcement and
counterintelligence, it is necessary to
retain this information to aid in
establishing patterns of activity and
provide investigative leads.
(vii) Subsection (e)(2). To collect
information from the subject individual
could serve notice that he or she is the
subject of a criminal investigation and
thereby present a serious impediment to
such investigations.
(viii) Subsection (e)(3). To inform
individuals as required by this
subsection could reveal the existence of
a criminal investigation and
compromise investigative efforts.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:52 May 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
(ix) Subsection (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I).
These subsections are inapplicable to
the extent exemption is claimed from
(d)(1) and (2).
(x) Subsection (e)(5). It is often
impossible to determine in advance if
investigatory records contained in this
system are accurate, relevant, timely
and complete, but, in the interests of
effective law enforcement, it is
necessary to retain this information to
aid in establishing patterns of activity
and provide investigative leads.
(xi) Subsection (e)(8). To serve notice
could give persons sufficient warning to
evade investigative efforts.
(xii) Subsection (g). This subsection is
inapplicable to the extent that the
system is exempt from other specific
subsections of the Privacy Act.
(4) In addition, in the course of
carrying out analysis for insider threats,
exempt records from other systems of
records may in turn become part of the
case records maintained in this system.
To the extent that copies of exempt
records from those other systems of
records are maintained into this system,
the DoD claims the same exemptions for
the records from those other systems
that are entered into this system, as
claimed for the original primary system
of which they are a part.
Dated: May 13, 2016.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
31563
representative. We invite your
comments on this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before June 20, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2016–0287 using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
further instructions on submitting
comments.
If
you have questions about this proposed
rulemaking, call or email MST1 Jennifer
Haggins, Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh,
U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 412–221–
0807, email Jennifer.L.Haggins@
uscg.mil.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Basis
[Docket Number USCG–2016–0286]
On March 24, 2016, the Three Rivers
Outboard Racing Association notified
the Coast Guard that it will be
conducting boat races from 9:00 a.m. to
7:00 p.m. daily beginning on August 19,
2016 and through August 21, 2016. The
boat races are scheduled to take place
on the Allegheny River from mile 44.1
to 45.1. The purpose of this rulemaking
is to ensure the safety of vessels,
participants, race spectators, and those
working in the boat racing event. The
Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking
under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231.
RIN 1625–AA00
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
[FR Doc. 2016–11702 Filed 5–18–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
Safety Zone; Allegheny River Mile 44.1
to 45.1, Kittanning, Pennsylvania
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard proposes to
establish a temporary safety zone for all
navigable waters of the Allegheny River
mile 44.1 to mile 45.1. This action is
needed to protect personnel, spectators,
participants, and vessels from potential
hazards associated with boat races.
Access to this safety zone would be
limited to those participating in or
working with the race sponsors unless
specifically authorized by the Captain of
the Pittsburgh or a designated
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The COTP proposes to establish a
safety zone from 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
daily beginning on August 19, 2016 and
through August 21, 2016. The safety
zone would cover all navigable waters
of the Allegheny River from mile 44.1 to
mile 45.1. The duration of the zone is
intended to ensure the safety of vessels,
participants, race spectators, and those
working the boat racing event on
navigable waters. Access to this safety
zone would be limited to those
participating in or working with the race
sponsors. No other vessel or person
would be permitted to enter the safety
zone without obtaining permission from
the COTP or a designated
representative. The regulatory text we
E:\FR\FM\19MYP1.SGM
19MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 97 (Thursday, May 19, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31561-31563]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11702]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 310
[Docket ID: DoD-2016-OS-0059]
Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of Defense, DoD.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of the Secretary of Defense proposes to exempt
records maintained in DUSDI 01-DoD ``Department of Defense (DoD)
Insider Threat Management and Analysis Center (DITMAC) and DoD
Component Insider Threat Records System,'' from subsections (c)(3) and
(4); (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4); (e)(1), (2), (3), (4)(G), (H), and (I),
(5), and (8); (f); and (g) of the Privacy Act. A system of records
notice for this system has been published today in the Federal
Register.
In addition, in the course of carrying out collections and analysis
of information in connection with the operations of the DITMAC and DoD
Component insider threat programs, exempt records received from other
systems of records may become part of this system. To the extent that
copies of exempt records from those other systems of records are
maintained in this system, the Department also claims the same
exemptions for the records from those other systems that are maintained
in this system, as claimed for the original primary system of which
they are a part.
DATES: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4) and (11), the public is
given a 30-day period in which to comment. Therefore, please submit any
comments by June 20, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and
title, by any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Department of Defense, Deputy Chief Management
Officer, Directorate for Oversight and Compliance, 4800 Mark Center
Drive, ATTN: Box 24, Alexandria, VA 22350-1700.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number for this Federal Register document. The general
policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is
to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet
at https://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change,
including any personal identifiers or contact information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Allard, Director of the Defense
Privacy, Civil Liberties, and Transparency Division, 703-571-0070.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The DITMAC was established by the Under
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence in order to consolidate and
analyze insider threat information reported by the DoD Component
insider threat programs
[[Page 31562]]
mandated by Presidential Executive Order 13587, issued October 7, 2011,
which required Federal agencies to establish an insider threat
detection and prevention program to ensure the security of classified
networks and the responsible sharing and safeguarding of classified
information consistent with appropriate protections for privacy and
civil liberties. For purposes of this system of records, the term
``insider threat'' is defined in the Minimum Standards for Executive
Branch Insider Threat Task Force based on direction provided in Section
6.3(b) of Executive Order 13587. The DITMAC helps prevent, deter,
detect, and/or mitigate the potential threat that personnel, including
DoD military personnel, civilian employees, and contractor personnel,
who have or had been granted eligibility for access to classified
information or eligibility to hold a sensitive position may harm the
security of the United States. This threat can include damage to the
United States through espionage, terrorism, unauthorized disclosure of
national security information, or through the loss or degradation of
departmental resources or capabilities.
The system of records will be used to analyze, monitor, and audit
insider threat information for insider threat detection and mitigation
within DoD on threats that persons who have or had been granted
eligibility for access to classified information or eligibility to hold
a sensitive positions may pose to DoD and U.S. Government
installations, facilities, personnel, missions, or resources. The
system of records will support the DITMAC and DoD Component insider
threat programs, enable the identification of systemic insider threat
issues and challenges, and provide a basis for the development and
recommendation of solutions to deter, detect, and/or mitigate potential
insider threats. It will assist in identifying best practices among
other Federal Government insider threat programs, through the use of
existing DoD resources and functions and by leveraging existing
authorities, policies, programs, systems, and architectures.
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' and Executive
Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review''
It has been determined that this rule is not a significant rule.
This rule does not (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy; a
sector of the economy; productivity; competition; jobs; the
environment; public health or safety; or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another Agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user
fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
these Executive orders.
Public Law 96-354, ``Regulatory Flexibility Act'' (5 U.S.C Chapter 6)
It has been certified that this rule does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because it is
concerned only with the administration of Privacy Act systems of
records within DoD. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required.
Public Law 96-511, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been determined that this rule does not impose additional
information collection requirements on the public under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Section 202, Public Law 104-4, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act''
It has been determined that this rule does not involve a Federal
mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more and that it will not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments.
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism''
It has been determined that this rule does not have federalism
implications. This rule does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the National Government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 310
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 310 is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 310 [Amended]
0
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 310 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Sec. Sec. 310.30 through 310.53 [Redesignated as Sec. Sec. 310.31
through 310.54]
0
2. Redesignate Sec. 310.30 through Sec. 310.53 as Sec. 310.31
through Sec. 310.54.
0
3. In Subpart F, add a new Sec. 310.30 to read as follows:
Sec. 310.30 DoD-wide exemptions.
(a) Use of DoD-wide exemptions. DoD-wide exemptions for DOD-wide
systems of records are established pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) and (k)
of the Privacy Act.
(b) Promises of confidentiality. (1) Only the identity of sources
that have been given an express promise of confidentiality may be
protected from disclosure under paragraphs (d)(3)(i), (ii), and (iii)
and (d)(4) of this section. However, the identity of sources who were
given implied promises of confidentiality in inquiries conducted before
September 27, 1975, also may be protected from disclosure.
(2) Ensure promises of confidentiality are not automatically given
but are used sparingly. Establish appropriate procedures and identify
fully categories of individuals who may make such promises. Promises of
confidentiality shall be made only when they are essential to obtain
the information sought (see 5 CFR part 736).
(c) Access to records for which DOD-wide exemptions are claimed.
Deny the individual access only to those portions of the records for
which the claimed exemption applies.
(d) DoD-wide exemptions. The following exemptions are applicable to
all components of the Department of Defense for the following system(s)
of records:
(1) System identifier and name: DUSDI 01-DoD ``Department of
Defense (DoD) Insider Threat Management and Analysis Center (DITMAC)
and DoD Component Insider Threat Records System.'' Exemption: This
system of records is exempted from subsections (c)(3) and (4); (d)(1),
(2), (3) and (4); (e)(1), (2), (3), (4)(G)(H) and (I), (5) and (8); and
(g) of the Privacy Act pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) (2) and (k)(1),
(2), (4), (5), (6), and (7).
(2) Records are only exempt from pertinent provisions of 5 U.S.C.
552a to the extent that such provisions have been identified and an
exemption claimed for the record and the purposes underlying the
exemption for the record pertain to the record.
(3) Exemption from the particular subsections is justified for the
following reasons:
(i) Subsection (c)(3). To provide the subject with an accounting of
disclosures of records in this system could inform that individual of
the existence, nature, or scope of an actual or potential law
enforcement or counterintelligence investigation, and thereby seriously
impede law enforcement or counterintelligence efforts by permitting the
record subject and other persons to whom he might disclose the records
to avoid criminal
[[Page 31563]]
penalties, civil remedies, or counterintelligence measures. Access to
the accounting of disclosures could also interfere with a civil or
administrative action or investigation which may impede in those
actions or investigations. Access also could reveal the identity of
confidential sources incident to Federal employment, military service,
contract, and security clearance determinations.
(ii) Subsection (c)(4). This subsection is inapplicable to the
extent that an exemption is being claimed for subsection (d).
(iii) Subsection (d)(1). Disclosure of records in the system could
reveal the identity of confidential sources and result in an
unwarranted invasion of the privacy of others. Disclosure may also
reveal information relating to actual or potential criminal
investigations. Disclosure of classified national security information
would cause damage to the national security of the United States.
Disclosure could also interfere with a civil or administrative action
or investigation; reveal the identity of confidential sources incident
to Federal employment, military service, contract, and security
clearance determinations; and reveal the confidentiality and integrity
of Federal testing materials and evaluation materials used for military
promotions when furnished by a confidential source.
(iv) Subsection (d)(2). Amendment of the records could interfere
with ongoing criminal or civil law enforcement proceedings and impose
an impossible administrative burden by requiring investigations to be
continuously reinvestigated.
(v) Subsections (d)(3) and (4). These subsections are inapplicable
to the extent exemption is claimed from (d)(1) and (2).
(vi) Subsection (e)(1). It is often impossible to determine in
advance if investigatory records contained in this system are accurate,
relevant, timely and complete, but, in the interests of effective law
enforcement and counterintelligence, it is necessary to retain this
information to aid in establishing patterns of activity and provide
investigative leads.
(vii) Subsection (e)(2). To collect information from the subject
individual could serve notice that he or she is the subject of a
criminal investigation and thereby present a serious impediment to such
investigations.
(viii) Subsection (e)(3). To inform individuals as required by this
subsection could reveal the existence of a criminal investigation and
compromise investigative efforts.
(ix) Subsection (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I). These subsections are
inapplicable to the extent exemption is claimed from (d)(1) and (2).
(x) Subsection (e)(5). It is often impossible to determine in
advance if investigatory records contained in this system are accurate,
relevant, timely and complete, but, in the interests of effective law
enforcement, it is necessary to retain this information to aid in
establishing patterns of activity and provide investigative leads.
(xi) Subsection (e)(8). To serve notice could give persons
sufficient warning to evade investigative efforts.
(xii) Subsection (g). This subsection is inapplicable to the extent
that the system is exempt from other specific subsections of the
Privacy Act.
(4) In addition, in the course of carrying out analysis for insider
threats, exempt records from other systems of records may in turn
become part of the case records maintained in this system. To the
extent that copies of exempt records from those other systems of
records are maintained into this system, the DoD claims the same
exemptions for the records from those other systems that are entered
into this system, as claimed for the original primary system of which
they are a part.
Dated: May 13, 2016.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2016-11702 Filed 5-18-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P