Army Privacy Program, 52767-52769 [2016-18822]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
inspection at https://
www.regulations.gov or upon request.
The IRS received no requests for a
public hearing, and none was held. The
final regulations adopt the proposed
regulations without change. The
temporary regulations are hereby made
obsolete and removed.
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
Effect on Other Documents
Temporary regulations § 300.13T are
obsolete as of September 9, 2016.
Special Analyses
Certain IRS regulations, including this
one, are exempt from the requirements
of Executive Order 12866, as
supplemented and reaffirmed by
Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a
regulatory impact assessment is not
required.
The Administrative Procedure Act
provides that substantive rules generally
will not be effective until thirty days
after the final regulations are published
in the Federal Register (5 U.S.C.
553(d)). The Treasury Department and
the IRS have determined that section 5
U.S.C. 553(d) of the Administrative
Procedure Act applies to these final
regulations.
The notice of proposed rulemaking
(REG–121496–15) included an initial
regulatory flexibility analysis. The
Treasury Department and the IRS
concluded in the initial regulatory
flexibility analysis that the proposed
regulations, if promulgated, may have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
None of the public comments submitted
under the regulation number for the
proposed regulation addressed the
initial regulatory flexibility analysis.
After further consideration, the Treasury
Department and the IRS conclude that
no final regulatory flexibility analysis is
required. The Treasury Department and
the IRS certify that the final regulations
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Although the final regulations
will likely affect a substantial number of
small entities, the economic impact on
those entities is not significant. The
final regulations establish a $33 fee to
apply for or renew a PTIN per original
or renewal application, which is a
reduction from the previously
established fee of $50 per original or
renewal application, and the $33 fee
will not have a significant economic
impact on a small entity.
Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the
Code, the notice of proposed rulemaking
that preceded these final regulations
was submitted to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration for comment on its
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:57 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
impact on small business. No comments
were received on the proposed
regulations.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Drafting Information
32 CFR Part 505
The principal author of these final
regulations is Hollie M. Marx, Office of
the Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure
and Administration). However, other
personnel from the Treasury
Department and the IRS participated in
their development.
52767
[USA–2016–HQ–0030]
List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 300
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, User fees.
Adoption of Amendments to the
Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 300 is
amended as follows:
PART 300—USER FEES
Paragraph 1. The authority citation
for part 300 continues to read as
follows:
■
Authority: 31 U.S.C. 9701.
Par. 2. Section 300.13 is amended by
adding paragraph (b) and revising
paragraph (d) to read as follows:
■
§ 300.13 Fee for obtaining a preparer tax
identification number.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Fee. The fee to apply for or renew
a preparer tax identification number is
$33 per year, which is the cost to the
government for processing the
application for a preparer tax
identification number and does not
include any fees charged by the vendor.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Applicability date. This section
will be applicable for applications for
and renewal of a preparer tax
identification number filed on or after
September 9, 2016.
§ 300.13T
■
[Removed]
Par. 3. Section 300.13T is removed.
John Dalrymple,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
Approved: July 14, 2016.
Mark J. Mazur,
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax
Policy).
[FR Doc. 2016–18925 Filed 8–9–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
PO 00000
Department of the Army
Army Privacy Program
Department of the Army, DoD.
Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of the Army
is amending the Army Privacy Program
Regulation. Specifically, Army is adding
exemption rules for Army system of
records ‘‘A0600–20 SAMR, Soldiers
Equal Opportunity Investigative Files’’.
This rule provides policies and
procedures for the Army’s
implementation of the Privacy Act of
1974, as amended. This direct final rule
makes changes to the Department of the
Army’s Privacy Program rule. These
changes will allow the Department to
exempt records from certain portions of
the Privacy Act. This will improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of the
Department of Defense’s (DoD’s)
program by preserving the exempt status
of the records when the purposes
underlying the exemption are valid and
necessary to protect the contents of the
records.
DATES: The rule will be effective
October 19, 2016 unless comments are
received that would result in a contrary
determination. Comments will be
accepted on or before October 11, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number and/or RIN
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, 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 or Regulatory
Information Number (RIN) for this
Federal Register document. The general
policy for comments and other
submissions from members of the public
is to make these submissions available
for public viewing on the Internet at
https://www.regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tracy C. Rogers, Chief, FOIA/PA,
telephone: 703–428–7499.
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\10AUR1.SGM
10AUR1
Ms.
52768
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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.
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.
Regulatory Procedures
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ and Executive
Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation
and Regulatory Review’’
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866
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
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. It has been determined this
Privacy Act 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:57 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
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 DoD does not
have significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
because it is concerned only with the
administration of Privacy Act within the
DoD.
Public Law 95–511, ‘‘Paperwork
Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been determined that this
Privacy Act rule for the DoD imposes no
information collection requirements on
the public under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995.
Section 202, Public Law 104–4,
‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’
It has been determined that this
Privacy Act rulemaking for the DoD
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 such
rulemaking will not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments.
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’
It has been determined that the
Privacy Act rule for the Department of
Defense does not have federalism
implications. The 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 505
Privacy.
Accordingly 32 CFR part 505 is
amended as follows:
PART 505—ARMY PRIVACY ACT
PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR
part 505 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Public Law 93–579, 88 Stat.
1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a).
2. Amend appendix D to part 505 by
adding paragraph (g)(35) to read as
follows:
■
Appendix D to Part 505—Exemptions,
Exceptions, and DoD Blanket Routine
Uses
*
PO 00000
*
*
Frm 00028
*
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
(g) * * *
(35) System identifier: A0600–20 SAMR.
(i) System name: Soldiers Equal
Opportunity Investigative Files.
(ii) Exemptions: Investigatory material
compiled for law enforcement purposes,
other than material within the scope of
subsection 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), is exempt
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2). However, if
an individual is denied any right, privilege,
or benefit for which he would otherwise be
entitled by Federal law or for which he
would otherwise be eligible, as a result of the
maintenance of such information, such
material shall be provided to the individual,
except to the extent that disclosure would
reveal the identity of a confidential source.
Therefore, portions of this system of records
may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552a(k)(2) from subsections 5 U.S.C.
552a(c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H),
(e)(4)(I), and (f).
(iii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2).
(iv) Reasons: (A) From subsection (c)(3)
because the release of the disclosure
accounting would permit the subject of a
criminal investigation or other investigation
conducted for law enforcement purposes to
obtain valuable information concerning the
nature of that investigation which will
present a serious impediment to law
enforcement.
(B) From subsection (d) because access to
such records contained in this system would
inform the subject of a criminal investigation
or other investigation conducted for law
enforcement purposes, of the existence of
that investigation, provide the subject of the
investigation with information that might
enable him to avoid detection or
apprehension, and would present a serious
impediment to law enforcement.
(C) From subsection (e)(1) because in the
course of criminal investigations or other law
enforcement investigations, information is
often obtained concerning the violations of
laws or civil obligations of others not relating
to an active case or matter. In the interests
of effective law enforcement, it is necessary
that this valuable information is retained
because it can aid in establishing patterns of
activity and provide valuable leads for other
agencies and future cases that may be
brought.
(D) From subsections (e)(4)(G) and (e)(4)(H)
because the requirements in those
subsections are inapplicable to the extent
that portions of this system of records may
be exempted from subsection (d), concerning
individual access.
(E) From subsection (e)(4)(I) because the
identity of specific sources must be withheld
to protect the confidentiality of the sources
of criminal and other law enforcement
information. This exemption is further
necessary to protect the privacy and physical
safety of witnesses and informants.
(F) From subsection (f) because portions of
this system of records have been exempted
from the access provisions of subsection (d).
(G) For records that are copies of exempt
records from external systems of records,
such records are only exempt from pertinent
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a to the extent such
provisions have been identified and an
exemption claimed for the original record
E:\FR\FM\10AUR1.SGM
10AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
and the purposes underlying the exemption
for the original record still pertain to the
record that is now contained in this system
of records. In general, the exemptions were
claimed to properly protect classified
information relating to national defense and
foreign policy; to avoid interference during
the conduct of criminal, civil, or
administrative actions or investigations; to
ensure protective services provided to the
President and others are not compromised; to
protect records used solely as statistical
records; to protect the identity of confidential
sources incident to Federal employment,
military service, contract, and security
clearance determinations; to preserve the
confidentiality and integrity of Federal
testing materials; and to safeguard evaluation
materials used for military promotions when
provided by a confidential source. The
exemption rule for the original records will
identify the specific reasons the records are
exempt from specific provisions of 5 U.S.C.
552a.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: August 4, 2016.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2016–18822 Filed 8–9–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2016–0677]
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Berwick Bay-Atchafalaya River,
Morgan City, LA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of deviation from
drawbridge regulations.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard has issued a
temporary deviation from the operating
schedule that governs the Morgan City
Railroad Bridge across Berwick Bay at
mile 17.5 of the Atchafalaya River and
the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Morgan
City to Port Allen Alternate Route, mile
0.3 in Morgan City, St. Mary Parish,
Louisiana. The deviation is necessary to
conduct maintenance on the bridge.
This deviation allows the bridge to
SUMMARY:
remain temporarily closed to navigation
for five hours.
DATES: This deviation is effective from
7 a.m. to noon on August 25, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this
deviation, [USCG–2016–0677] is
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Type the docket number in the
‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH’’.
Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this temporary
deviation, call or email David Frank,
Bridge Administration Branch, Coast
Guard; telephone 504–671–2128, email
david.m.frank@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway
Company requested a temporary
deviation from the operating schedule of
the Morgan City Railroad Bridge across
Berwick Bay at mile 17.5 of the
Atchafalaya River and the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway, Morgan City to
Port Allen Alternate Route, mile 0.3 in
Morgan City, St. Mary Parish, Louisiana.
This deviation was requested to allow
the bridge owner to replace a cracked
joint on the west end of the bridge. This
bridge is governed by 33 CFR 117.5.
This deviation allows the vertical lift
bridge to remain closed to navigation
from 7 a.m. to noon on Thursday,
August 25, 2016. The bridge has a
vertical clearance of 4 feet above high
water in the closed-to-navigation
position and 73 feet above high water in
the open-to-navigation position.
Navigation on the waterway consists of
tugs with tows, oil industry related
work boats and crew boats, commercial
fishing vessels and some recreational
craft.
Vessels able to pass through the
bridge in the closed position may do so
at any time and should pass at the
slowest safe speed. The bridge will not
be able to open for emergencies and the
Morgan City-Port Allen Landside route
through Amelia, LA is the closest
available alternate route.
The Coast Guard will also inform the
users of the waterways through our
Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners
of the change in operating schedule for
the bridge.
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e),
the drawbridge must return to its regular
52769
operating schedule immediately at the
end of the effective period of this
temporary deviation. This deviation
from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator, Eighth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2016–18968 Filed 8–9–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2016–0685]
Safety Zones; Multiple Fireworks and
Swim in Captain of the Port New York
Zone
AGENCY:
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of enforcement of
regulation.
ACTION:
The Coast Guard will enforce
various safety zones within the Captain
of the Port New York Zone on the
specified dates and times. This action is
necessary to ensure the safety of vessels
and spectators from hazards associated
with fireworks displays. During the
enforcement period, no person or vessel
may enter the safety zones without
permission of the Captain of the Port
(COTP).
SUMMARY:
The regulation for the safety
zones described in 33 CFR 165.160 will
be enforced on the dates and times
listed in the table below.
DATES:
If
you have questions on this document,
call or email Petty Officer First Class
Ronald Sampert U.S. Coast Guard;
telephone 718–354–4197, email
ronald.j.sampert@uscg.mil.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The Coast
Guard will enforce the safety zones
listed in 33 CFR 165.160 on the
specified dates and times as indicated in
Tables 1 and 2 below. This regulation
was published in the Federal Register
on November 9, 2011 (76 FR 69614).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
TABLE 1
1. First Data Corp Fireworks Display, Ellis Island Safety Zone; 33 CFR
165.160 (2.2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:57 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
• Launch site: A barge located between Federal Anchorages 20–A
and 20–B, in approximate position 40°41′45″ N., 074°02′09″ W.
(NAD 1983) about 365 yards east of Ellis Island. This Safety Zone is
a 360-yard radius from the barge.
• Date: September 10, 2016.
• Time: 7:40 p.m.–9:00 p.m.
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\10AUR1.SGM
10AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 154 (Wednesday, August 10, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52767-52769]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18822]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army
32 CFR Part 505
[USA-2016-HQ-0030]
Army Privacy Program
AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of the Army is amending the Army Privacy
Program Regulation. Specifically, Army is adding exemption rules for
Army system of records ``A0600-20 SAMR, Soldiers Equal Opportunity
Investigative Files''. This rule provides policies and procedures for
the Army's implementation of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended. This
direct final rule makes changes to the Department of the Army's Privacy
Program rule. These changes will allow the Department to exempt records
from certain portions of the Privacy Act. This will improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of the Department of Defense's (DoD's)
program by preserving the exempt status of the records when the
purposes underlying the exemption are valid and necessary to protect
the contents of the records.
DATES: The rule will be effective October 19, 2016 unless comments are
received that would result in a contrary determination. Comments will
be accepted on or before October 11, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and/or
RIN 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, 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 or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this
Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other
submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions
available for public viewing on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Tracy C. Rogers, Chief, FOIA/PA,
telephone: 703-428-7499.
[[Page 52768]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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.
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.
Regulatory Procedures
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' and Executive
Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review''
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 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 and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. It has been determined this Privacy Act 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 determined that this Privacy Act rule for the DoD does
not have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities because it is concerned only with the administration of
Privacy Act within the DoD.
Public Law 95-511, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule for the DoD
imposes no information collection requirements on the public under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Section 202, Public Law 104-4, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act''
It has been determined that this Privacy Act rulemaking for the DoD
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 such rulemaking will
not significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism''
It has been determined that the Privacy Act rule for the Department
of Defense does not have federalism implications. The 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 505
Privacy.
Accordingly 32 CFR part 505 is amended as follows:
PART 505--ARMY PRIVACY ACT PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 505 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Public Law 93-579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a).
0
2. Amend appendix D to part 505 by adding paragraph (g)(35) to read as
follows:
Appendix D to Part 505--Exemptions, Exceptions, and DoD Blanket Routine
Uses
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(35) System identifier: A0600-20 SAMR.
(i) System name: Soldiers Equal Opportunity Investigative Files.
(ii) Exemptions: Investigatory material compiled for law
enforcement purposes, other than material within the scope of
subsection 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), is exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552a(k)(2). However, if an individual is denied any right,
privilege, or benefit for which he would otherwise be entitled by
Federal law or for which he would otherwise be eligible, as a result
of the maintenance of such information, such material shall be
provided to the individual, except to the extent that disclosure
would reveal the identity of a confidential source. Therefore,
portions of this system of records may be exempt pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) from subsections 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), (d), (e)(1),
(e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I), and (f).
(iii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2).
(iv) Reasons: (A) From subsection (c)(3) because the release of
the disclosure accounting would permit the subject of a criminal
investigation or other investigation conducted for law enforcement
purposes to obtain valuable information concerning the nature of
that investigation which will present a serious impediment to law
enforcement.
(B) From subsection (d) because access to such records contained
in this system would inform the subject of a criminal investigation
or other investigation conducted for law enforcement purposes, of
the existence of that investigation, provide the subject of the
investigation with information that might enable him to avoid
detection or apprehension, and would present a serious impediment to
law enforcement.
(C) From subsection (e)(1) because in the course of criminal
investigations or other law enforcement investigations, information
is often obtained concerning the violations of laws or civil
obligations of others not relating to an active case or matter. In
the interests of effective law enforcement, it is necessary that
this valuable information is retained because it can aid in
establishing patterns of activity and provide valuable leads for
other agencies and future cases that may be brought.
(D) From subsections (e)(4)(G) and (e)(4)(H) because the
requirements in those subsections are inapplicable to the extent
that portions of this system of records may be exempted from
subsection (d), concerning individual access.
(E) From subsection (e)(4)(I) because the identity of specific
sources must be withheld to protect the confidentiality of the
sources of criminal and other law enforcement information. This
exemption is further necessary to protect the privacy and physical
safety of witnesses and informants.
(F) From subsection (f) because portions of this system of
records have been exempted from the access provisions of subsection
(d).
(G) For records that are copies of exempt records from external
systems of records, such records are only exempt from pertinent
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a to the extent such provisions have been
identified and an exemption claimed for the original record
[[Page 52769]]
and the purposes underlying the exemption for the original record
still pertain to the record that is now contained in this system of
records. In general, the exemptions were claimed to properly protect
classified information relating to national defense and foreign
policy; to avoid interference during the conduct of criminal, civil,
or administrative actions or investigations; to ensure protective
services provided to the President and others are not compromised;
to protect records used solely as statistical records; to protect
the identity of confidential sources incident to Federal employment,
military service, contract, and security clearance determinations;
to preserve the confidentiality and integrity of Federal testing
materials; and to safeguard evaluation materials used for military
promotions when provided by a confidential source. The exemption
rule for the original records will identify the specific reasons the
records are exempt from specific provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a.
* * * * *
Dated: August 4, 2016.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2016-18822 Filed 8-9-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P