Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation, 38950-38951 [2016-14183]

Download as PDF 38950 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Rules and Regulations Issued in Washington, DC, on this 9th day of June 2016. Judith Starr, General Counsel, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. [FR Doc. 2016–14076 Filed 6–14–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7709–02–P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DOD–2016–OS–0063] 32 CFR Part 311 Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation Office of the Secretary, DoD. Direct final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: The Office of the Secretary of Defense is exempting those records contained in DMDC 24 DoD, entitled ‘‘Defense Information System for Security (DISS),’’ when investigatory material is compiled solely for the purpose of determining suitability, eligibility, or qualifications for Federal civilian employment, military service, Federal contracts, or access to classified information, but only to the extent that such material would reveal the identity of a confidential source. This direct final rule establishes a new exemption to the Office of the Secretary Privacy Program. The Defense Information System for Security is the new DoD enterprise-wide information system for personnel security; it provides a common, comprehensive medium to request, record, document, and identify personnel security actions within the Department including: Determinations of eligibility and access to classified information, national security, suitability and/or fitness for employment, and HSPD–12 determination for Personal Identity Verification (PIV) to access government facilities and systems, submitting adverse information, verification of investigation and or adjudicative status, support of continuous evaluation and insider threat detection, prevention, and mitigation activities. DISS consists of two applications, the Case Adjudication Tracking system (CATS) and the Joint Verification System (JVS). CATS is used by the DoD Adjudicative Community for the purpose of recording eligibility determinations. JVS is used by DoD Security Managers and Industry Facility Security Officers for the purpose of verifying eligibility, recording access determinations, submitting incidents for subsequent adjudication, and visit requests from the field (worldwide). The records may also be used as a ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:36 Jun 14, 2016 Jkt 238001 management tool for statistical analyses, tracking, reporting, evaluating program effectiveness, and conducting research. This direct final rule is consistent with the rule currently published regarding DMDC 11, Investigative Records Repository. DATES: The rule is effective on September 13, 2016 unless adverse comments are received by August 15, 2016. If adverse comment is received, the Department of Defense will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the Federal Register. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: Department of Defense, Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer, Directorate for Oversight and Compliance, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Mailbox #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 http:// www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs. Luz D. Ortiz, 571–372–0478. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is being published as a direct final rule as the Department of Defense does not expect to receive any adverse comments, and so a proposed rule is unnecessary. Direct Final Rule and Significant Adverse Comments DoD has determined this rulemaking meets the criteria for a direct final rule because it involves non-substantive changes dealing with DoD’s management of its Privacy Programs. DoD expects no opposition to the changes and no significant adverse comments. However, if DoD receives a significant adverse comment, the Department will withdraw this direct final rule by publishing a notice in the Federal Register. A significant adverse comment is one that explains: (1) Why the direct final rule is inappropriate, including challenges to the rule’s underlying premise or approach; or (2) why the direct final rule will be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. In determining whether a PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 comment necessitates withdrawal of this direct final rule, DoD will consider whether it warrants a substantive response in a notice and comment process. Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ and Executive Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review’’ It has been determined that Privacy Act rules for the Department of Defense are not significant rules. The rules do 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 determined that this Privacy Act rule for the Department of Defense does not have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because it is concerned only with the administration of Privacy Act systems of records within the Department of Defense. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required. Public Law 95–511, ‘‘Paperwork Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule for the Department of Defense imposes no additional information requirements beyond the Department of Defense and that the information collected within the Department of Defense is necessary and consistent with 5 U.S.C. 552a, known as the Privacy Act of 1074. Section 202, Public Law 104–4, ‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’ It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule for the Department of Defense 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 this rulemaking will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. E:\FR\FM\15JNR1.SGM 15JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Rules and Regulations Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’ It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule for the Department of Defense does not have federalism implications. This rule does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, no Federalism assessment is required. investigatory purposes, it is not always possible to determine the relevance and necessity of particular information in the early stages of the investigation. It is only after the information is evaluated in light of other information that its relevance and necessity becomes clear. Such information permits more informed decision-making by the Department when making required suitability, eligibility, and qualification determinations. Dated: May 24, 2016. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 311 Privacy. Accordingly, 32 CFR part 311 is amended as follows: [FR Doc. 2016–14183 Filed 6–14–16; 8:45 am] PART 311—OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AND JOINT STAFF PRIVACY PROGRAM 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 311 continues to read as follows: ■ BILLING CODE 5001–06–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a. 2. Section 311.8 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(27) to read as follows: 33 CFR Part 100 § 311.8 Special Local Regulation; Annual Kennewick, Washington, Columbia Unlimited Hydroplane Races ■ Procedures for exemptions. ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES * * * * * (c) * * * (27) System identifier and name: DMDC 24 DoD, Defense Information System for Security (DISS). (i) Exemption: Investigatory material compiled solely for the purpose of determining suitability, eligibility, or qualifications for Federal civilian employment, military service, Federal contracts, or access to classified information may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5), but only to the extent that such material would reveal the identity of a confidential source. (ii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5). (iii) Reasons: (A) from subsections (c)(3) and (d) when access to accounting disclosure and access to or amendment of records would cause the identity of a confidential source to be revealed. Disclosure of the source’s identity not only will result in the Department breaching the promise of confidentiality made to the source but it will impair the Department’s future ability to compile investigatory material for the purpose of determining suitability, eligibility, or qualifications for Federal civilian employment, Federal contracts, or access to classified information. Unless sources can be assured that a promise of confidentiality will be honored, they will be less likely to provide information considered essential to the Department in making the required determinations. (B) From subsection (e)(1) because in the collection of information for VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:36 Jun 14, 2016 Jkt 238001 [Docket No. USCG–2016–0358] Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of enforcement of regulation. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard will enforce the special local regulation for the Annual Kennewick, Washington, Columbia Unlimited Hydroplane Races from 7 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. each day, from July 29, 2016, through July 31, 2016. This enforcement action is necessary to assist in minimizing the inherent dangers associated with hydroplane races. Our regulation for Recurring Marine Events in Captain of the Port Sector Columbia River Zone identifies the regulated area for this regatta. During the enforcement period, no vessel may transit this regulated area without approval from the Captain of the Port or a designated representative. DATES: The regulation in 33 CFR 100.1303 will be enforced from 7 a.m. until 5:30 p.m. on July 29, 2016 through July 31, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this notice of enforcement, call or email Mr. Ken Lawrenson, Waterways Management Division, MSU Portland, Oregon, Coast Guard; telephone 503–240–9319, email msupdxwwm@uscg.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce special local regulations in 33 CFR 100.1303 from 7 a.m. until 5:30 p.m. on July 29, 2016, SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 38951 through July 31, 2016, for the Annual Kennewick, Washington, Columbia Unlimited Hydroplane Races. This enforcement action is being taken to provide for the safety of life on navigable waterways during the regatta. Our regulation for Annual Kennewick, Washington, Columbia Unlimited Hydroplane, § 100.1303, specifies the location of the regulated area for all waters of the Columbia river bounded by two lines drawn from between position latitude 46°14′07″ N., longitude 119°10′42″ W. and position latitude 46°13′42″ N., longitude 119°10′51″ W.; and the second line running between position latitude 46°13′35″ N., longitude 119°07′34″ W. and position latitude 46°13′10″ N., longitude 119°07′47″ W. As specified in § 100.1303, during the enforcement period, no vessel may transit this regulated area without approval from the Captain of the Port Sector Columbia River (COTP) or a COTP designated representative. This notice of enforcement is issued under authority of 33 CFR 100.1303 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice of enforcement in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard plans to provide notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners and marine information broadcasts. Dated: June 7, 2016. D.F. Berliner, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Alternate Captain of the Port, Sector Columbia River. [FR Doc. 2016–14067 Filed 6–14–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG–2016–0497] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Mullica River, Green Bank, NJ Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Green Bank Bridge (Green Bank Road/CR563) across the Mullica River, mile 18.0, at Green Bank, NJ. The deviation is necessary to perform bridge repairs. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position. DATES: This deviation is effective from 7:30 a.m. on June 20, 2016, through 3:30 p.m. on June 23, 2016. SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\15JNR1.SGM 15JNR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 115 (Wednesday, June 15, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38950-38951]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14183]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Docket ID: DOD-2016-OS-0063]

32 CFR Part 311


Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DoD.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Office of the Secretary of Defense is exempting those 
records contained in DMDC 24 DoD, entitled ``Defense Information System 
for Security (DISS),'' when investigatory material is compiled solely 
for the purpose of determining suitability, eligibility, or 
qualifications for Federal civilian employment, military service, 
Federal contracts, or access to classified information, but only to the 
extent that such material would reveal the identity of a confidential 
source.
    This direct final rule establishes a new exemption to the Office of 
the Secretary Privacy Program. The Defense Information System for 
Security is the new DoD enterprise-wide information system for 
personnel security; it provides a common, comprehensive medium to 
request, record, document, and identify personnel security actions 
within the Department including: Determinations of eligibility and 
access to classified information, national security, suitability and/or 
fitness for employment, and HSPD-12 determination for Personal Identity 
Verification (PIV) to access government facilities and systems, 
submitting adverse information, verification of investigation and or 
adjudicative status, support of continuous evaluation and insider 
threat detection, prevention, and mitigation activities. DISS consists 
of two applications, the Case Adjudication Tracking system (CATS) and 
the Joint Verification System (JVS). CATS is used by the DoD 
Adjudicative Community for the purpose of recording eligibility 
determinations. JVS is used by DoD Security Managers and Industry 
Facility Security Officers for the purpose of verifying eligibility, 
recording access determinations, submitting incidents for subsequent 
adjudication, and visit requests from the field (worldwide). The 
records may also be used as a management tool for statistical analyses, 
tracking, reporting, evaluating program effectiveness, and conducting 
research. This direct final rule is consistent with the rule currently 
published regarding DMDC 11, Investigative Records Repository.

DATES: The rule is effective on September 13, 2016 unless adverse 
comments are received by August 15, 2016. If adverse comment is 
received, the Department of Defense will publish a timely withdrawal of 
the rule in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and 
title, by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Department of Defense, Office of the Deputy Chief 
Management Officer, Directorate for Oversight and Compliance, 4800 Mark 
Center Drive, Mailbox #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 http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, 
including any personal identifiers or contact information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs. Luz D. Ortiz, 571-372-0478.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  This rule is being published as a direct 
final rule as the Department of Defense does not expect to receive any 
adverse comments, and so a proposed rule is unnecessary.

Direct Final Rule and Significant Adverse Comments

    DoD has determined this rulemaking meets the criteria for a direct 
final rule because it involves non-substantive changes dealing with 
DoD's management of its Privacy Programs. DoD expects no opposition to 
the changes and no significant adverse comments. However, if DoD 
receives a significant adverse comment, the Department will withdraw 
this direct final rule by publishing a notice in the Federal Register. 
A significant adverse comment is one that explains: (1) Why the direct 
final rule is inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's 
underlying premise or approach; or (2) why the direct final rule will 
be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. In determining whether 
a comment necessitates withdrawal of this direct final rule, DoD will 
consider whether it warrants a substantive response in a notice and 
comment process.

Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' and Executive 
Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review''

    It has been determined that Privacy Act rules for the Department of 
Defense are not significant rules. The rules do 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 determined that this Privacy Act rule for the 
Department of Defense does not have significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities because it is concerned only with 
the administration of Privacy Act systems of records within the 
Department of Defense. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not 
required.

Public Law 95-511, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)

    It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule for the 
Department of Defense imposes no additional information requirements 
beyond the Department of Defense and that the information collected 
within the Department of Defense is necessary and consistent with 5 
U.S.C. 552a, known as the Privacy Act of 1074.

Section 202, Public Law 104-4, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act''

    It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule for the 
Department of Defense 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 this rulemaking will not significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments.

[[Page 38951]]

Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism''

    It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule for the 
Department of Defense does not have federalism implications. This rule 
does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. Therefore, no Federalism assessment is required.

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 311

    Privacy.

    Accordingly, 32 CFR part 311 is amended as follows:

PART 311--OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AND JOINT STAFF 
PRIVACY PROGRAM

0
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 311 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a.


0
2. Section 311.8 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(27) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  311.8  Procedures for exemptions.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (27) System identifier and name: DMDC 24 DoD, Defense Information 
System for Security (DISS).
    (i) Exemption: Investigatory material compiled solely for the 
purpose of determining suitability, eligibility, or qualifications for 
Federal civilian employment, military service, Federal contracts, or 
access to classified information may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 
552a(k)(5), but only to the extent that such material would reveal the 
identity of a confidential source.
    (ii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5).
    (iii) Reasons: (A) from subsections (c)(3) and (d) when access to 
accounting disclosure and access to or amendment of records would cause 
the identity of a confidential source to be revealed. Disclosure of the 
source's identity not only will result in the Department breaching the 
promise of confidentiality made to the source but it will impair the 
Department's future ability to compile investigatory material for the 
purpose of determining suitability, eligibility, or qualifications for 
Federal civilian employment, Federal contracts, or access to classified 
information. Unless sources can be assured that a promise of 
confidentiality will be honored, they will be less likely to provide 
information considered essential to the Department in making the 
required determinations.
    (B) From subsection (e)(1) because in the collection of information 
for investigatory purposes, it is not always possible to determine the 
relevance and necessity of particular information in the early stages 
of the investigation. It is only after the information is evaluated in 
light of other information that its relevance and necessity becomes 
clear. Such information permits more informed decision-making by the 
Department when making required suitability, eligibility, and 
qualification determinations.

    Dated: May 24, 2016.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2016-14183 Filed 6-14-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 5001-06-P