Freedom of Information Act Regulations, 64401-64403 [2016-22166]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2016 / Proposed Rules sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS its right to submit a notice of appeal to the Departmental Appeals Board. The request for withdrawal must be in writing and sent to the Principal Deputy Inspector General via registered or certified mail. (2) Within 60 days after OIG’s receipt of a Unit’s withdrawal request, a Unit may, in accordance with (f)(2) of this section, submit a notice of appeal to the Departmental Appeals Board. (e) Implementation of decisions for reconsideration of a disallowance. (1) After undertaking a reconsideration, the Principal Deputy Inspector General may affirm, reverse, or revise the disallowance and shall issue a final written reconsideration decision to the Unit in accordance with 42 CFR 430.42(c)(5) and (c)(3) of this section. (2) If the reconsideration decision requires an adjustment of FFP, either upward or downward, a subsequent grant action will be made in the amount of such increase or decrease. (3) Within 60 days after receipt of a reconsideration decision from OIG, a Unit may, in accordance with paragraph (f) of this section, submit a notice of appeal to the Departmental Appeals Board. (f) Appeal of disallowance. (1) The Departmental Appeals Board reviews disallowances of FFP under title XIX, including disallowances issued by OIG to the Units. (2) A Unit that wishes to appeal a disallowance to the Departmental Appeals Board must follow the requirements in 42 CFR 430.42(f)(2). (3) The appeals procedures are those set forth in 45 CFR part 16 for Medicaid and for many other programs, including the MFCUs, administered by the Department. (4) The Departmental Appeals Board may affirm the disallowance, reverse the disallowance, modify the disallowance, or remand the disallowance to OIG for further consideration. (5) The Departmental Appeals Board will issue a final written decision to the Unit consistent with 45 CFR part 16. (6) If the appeal decision requires an adjustment of FFP, either upward or downward, a subsequent grant action will be made in the amount of increase or decrease. Subpart-D—Other Provisions § 1007.23 What other HHS regulations apply to a Unit? The following regulations from 45 CFR subtitle A apply to grants under this part: Part 16—Procedures of the Departmental Grant Appeals Board; VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:30 Sep 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 Part 75—Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for HHS Awards; Part 80—Nondiscrimination under Programs Receiving Federal Assistance through HHS, Effectuation of title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Part 81—Practice and Procedure for Hearings under 45 CFR part 80; Part 84—Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Programs and Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance; Part 91—Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Age in Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance from HHS. Dated: June 16, 2016. Daniel R. Levinson, Inspector General. Approved: June 23, 2016. Sylvia M. Burwell, Secretary. Editor’s Note: This document was received for publication by the Office of Federal Register on September 12, 2016. [FR Doc. 2016–22269 Filed 9–19–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4152–01–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of the Secretary 43 CFR Part 2 [No. DOI–2016–0006; 16XD4523WS DS10200000 DWSN00000.000000 WBS DP10202] RIN 1093–AA21 Freedom of Information Act Regulations Office of the Secretary, Interior. Proposed rule. AGENCY: ACTION: This rulemaking would revise the regulations that the Department of the Interior (Department) follows in processing records under the Freedom of Information Act in part to comply with the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016. The revisions would clarify and update procedures for requesting information from the Department and procedures that the Department follows in responding to requests from the public. SUMMARY: Comments on the rulemaking must be submitted on or before November 21, 2016. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the rulemaking by either of the methods listed below. Please use Regulation Identifier Number 1093– AA21 in your message. DATES: PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 64401 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. In the ‘‘Search’’ bar, enter DOI–2016–0006 (the docket number for this rule) and then click ‘‘Search.’’ Follow the instructions on the Web site for submitting comments. 2. U.S. mail, courier, or hand delivery: Executive Secretariat—FOIA regulations, Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC 20240. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Cafaro, Office of Executive Secretariat and Regulatory Affairs, 202– 208–5342. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Why We’re Publishing This Proposed Rule and What It Does In late 2012, the Department published a final rule updating and replacing the Department’s previous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) regulations. In early 2016, the Department updated that final rule, primarily to authorize the Office of Inspector General (OIG) to process their own FOIA appeals. On June 30, 2016, the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, Pub. L. 114–185, 130 Stat. 538 (the Act) was enacted. The Act specifically requires all agencies to review and update their FOIA regulations in accordance with its provisions, and the Department is making changes to its regulations accordingly. Finally, the Department has received feedback from its FOIA practitioners and requesters and identified areas where it would be possible to further update, clarify, and streamline the language of some procedural provisions. Therefore, the Department is proposing to make the following changes: • Section 2.4(e) would be amended to provide additional guidance on how bureaus handle misdirected requests. • Section 2.15 would be amended to bring attention to the Department’s existing FOIA Request Tracking Tool (https://foia.doi.gov/requeststatus). • Section 2.19 would be amended to bring further attention to the services provided by the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS), in accordance with the provisions of the Act. • Section 2.21 would be amended to reflect that the OGIS would be defined earlier in the regulations than it previously had been. • Section 2.24 would be amended to require a foreseeable harm analysis, in accordance with the provisions of the Act, and to require bureaus to provide an explanation to the requester when an estimate of the volume of any records withheld in full or in part is not provided. E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1 64402 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2016 / Proposed Rules • Section 2.37(f) would be amended to reflect the provisions of the Act. • Section 2.39 would be amended to remove what would be superfluous language, after the changes to section 2.37(f). • Section 2.58 would be amended to provide more time for requesters to appeal, in accordance with the provisions of the Act. II. Compliance With Laws and Executive Orders 1. Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) Executive Order (E.O) 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs will review all significant rules. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rulemaking is not significant. Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the nation’s regulatory system to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. The Executive Order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this proposed rule in a manner consistent with these requirements. 2. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Department of the Interior certifies that this rulemaking will not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 3. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 16:30 Sep 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act This rulemaking does not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per year. This rulemaking does not have a significant or unique effect on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. A statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required. 5. Takings (E.O. 12630) In accordance with Executive Order 12630, this rulemaking does not have significant takings implications. A takings implication assessment is not required. 6. Federalism (E.O. 13132) In accordance with Executive Order 13132, this proposed rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. It would not substantially and directly affect the relationship between the Federal and state governments. A federalism summary impact statement is not required. 7. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Office of the Solicitor has determined that this rulemaking does not unduly burden the judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Executive Order. 8. Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 13175) Under the criteria in Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated this proposed rule and determined that it has no potential effects on federally recognized Indian tribes. This rulemaking does not have tribal implications that impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian Tribal governments. 9. Paperwork Reduction Act This is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule: a. Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. b. Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions. c. Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or VerDate Sep<11>2014 the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This proposed rule does not contain information collection requirements, and a submission to the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act is not required. 10. National Environmental Policy Act This rulemaking does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. A detailed statement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 seq. (NEPA), is not required. Pursuant to 43 CFR 46.205(b) and 43 CFR 46.210(i), the Department of the Interior NEPA implementing procedures exclude from preparation of an environmental assessment or impact statement ‘‘[p]olicies, directives, regulations, and guidelines: that are of an administrative, financial, legal, technical, or procedural nature. . . .’’ None of the extraordinary circumstances listed in 43 CFR 46.215 exists for this rulemaking. Accordingly, this proposed rule is categorically excluded from environmental analysis under 43 CFR 46.210(i). 11. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 13211) This rulemaking is not a significant energy action under the definition in Executive Order 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is not required. This rulemaking will not have a significant effect on the nation’s energy supply, distribution, or use. 12. Clarity of This Proposed Regulation We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain language. This means that each rule we publish must: (a) Be logically organized; (b) Use the active voice to address readers directly; (c) Use clear language rather than jargon; (d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and (e) Use lists and tables wherever possible. If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs that you find unclear, which sections or sentences are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc. 13. Public Availability of Comments Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2016 / Proposed Rules List of Subjects in 43 CFR Part 2 Subpart E—Responses to Requests Freedom of information. § 2.21 For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of the Interior proposes to amend part 2 of title 43 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows: PART 2—FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT; RECORDS AND TESTIMONY 1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a, 553; 31 U.S.C. 3717; 43 U.S.C. 1460, 1461. Subpart B—How to Make a Request 2. In § 2.4, revise paragraph (e) to read as follows: ■ § 2.24 § 2.4 Does where you send your request affect its processing? * * * * (e) If your request is received by a bureau that believes it is not the appropriate bureau to process your request, the bureau that received your request will attempt to contact you (if possible, via telephone or email) to confirm that you deliberately sent your request to that bureau for processing. If you do not confirm this, the bureau will deem your request misdirected and route the misdirected request to the appropriate bureau to respond under the basic time limit outlined in § 2.17 of this part. * * * * * 6. Amend § 2.24 by: a. In paragraph (b)(3), adding the words ‘‘, along with a statement that the bureau reasonably foresees that disclosure would harm an interest protected by the applied exemption(s) or disclosure is prohibited by law’’ after the words ‘‘or in part’’; and b. In paragraph (b)(4), adding the word ‘‘including’’ after the word ‘‘unless’’ and adding the words ‘‘and the bureau explains this harm to you’’ after the words ‘‘withhold the records’’. Subpart G—Fees Subpart D—Timing of Responses to Requests [Amended] 3. In § 2.15, add paragraph (g) to read as follows: ■ § 2.15 What is multitrack processing and how does it affect your request? sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS * * * * * (g) You may track the status of your request, including its estimated processing completion date, at https:// foia.doi.gov/requeststatus/. [Amended] 4. In § 2.19(b)(2), add the words ‘‘, and notify you of your right to seek dispute resolution from the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS)’’ after the words ‘‘you and the bureau’’. ■ VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:30 Sep 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 What general principles govern * * * * (f) If the bureau does not comply with any time limit in the FOIA: (1) Except as provided in paragraph (f)(2) of this section, the bureau cannot assess any search fees (or, if you are in the fee category of a representative of the news media or an educational and noncommercial scientific institution, duplication fees). (2)(i) If the bureau has determined that unusual circumstances apply (as the term is defined in § 2.70 of this part) and the bureau provided you a timely written notice to extend the basic time limit in accordance with § 2.19 of this part, the noncompliance is excused for an additional 10 calendar days. If the bureau fails to comply with the extended time limit, the bureau may not assess any search fees (or, if you are in the fee category of a representative of the news media or an educational and noncommercial scientific institution, duplication fees). (ii) If the bureau has determined that unusual circumstances apply and more than 5,000 pages are necessary to respond to the request, the noncompliance is excused if, in accordance with § 2.19 of this part, the bureau has provided you a timely written notice and has discussed with you via written mail, email, or telephone (or made not less than 3 goodfaith attempts to do so) how you could effectively limit the scope of the request. Frm 00047 [Amended] 8. In § 2.39, remove the paragraph (a) designation and remove paragraph (b). Subpart H—Administrative Appeals § 2.58 [Amended] 9. In § 2.58(a) and (b), remove the number ‘‘30’’ and add in its place the number ‘‘90’’. ■ [FR Doc. 2016–22166 Filed 9–19–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4334–63–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 44 CFR Part 9 [Docket ID: FEMA–2015–0006] RIN 1660–AA85 * PO 00000 § 2.39 Federal Emergency Management Agency [Amended] 7. In § 2.37, revise paragraph (f) to read as follows: § 2.37 fees? (iii) If a court has determined that exceptional circumstances exist (as that term is defined in § 2.70 of this part), the noncompliance is excused for the length of time provided by the court order. * * * * * ■ ■ * § 2.19 [Amended] ■ § 2.37 § 2.15 [Amended] 5. In § 2.21(a), the second sentence, remove the words ‘‘Office of Government Information Services (OGIS)’’ and add in their place ‘‘the OGIS’’. ■ Kristen J. Sarri, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management, and Budget. 64403 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Updates to Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands Regulations To Implement Executive Order 13690 and the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of data availability. AGENCY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is issuing this Notice of Data Availability (NODA) in connection with the proposed rule titled, ‘‘Updates to Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands Regulations to Implement Executive Order 13690 and the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard’’ that was published on August 22, 2016. Through this NODA, FEMA is making available to the public, and soliciting comment on, a draft report, 2016 Evaluation of the Benefits of Freeboard for Public and Nonresidential Buildings in Coastal Areas. The draft report has been added to the docket for the proposed rule. DATES: Comments must be received no later than October 21, 2016. Late comments will not be accepted. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket ID: FEMA–2015– 0006, by one of the following methods: Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 20, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 64401-64403]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22166]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of the Secretary

43 CFR Part 2

[No. DOI-2016-0006; 16XD4523WS DS10200000 DWSN00000.000000 WBS DP10202]
RIN 1093-AA21


Freedom of Information Act Regulations

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rulemaking would revise the regulations that the 
Department of the Interior (Department) follows in processing records 
under the Freedom of Information Act in part to comply with the FOIA 
Improvement Act of 2016. The revisions would clarify and update 
procedures for requesting information from the Department and 
procedures that the Department follows in responding to requests from 
the public.

DATES: Comments on the rulemaking must be submitted on or before 
November 21, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the rulemaking by either of the 
methods listed below. Please use Regulation Identifier Number 1093-AA21 
in your message.
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the 
``Search'' bar, enter DOI-2016-0006 (the docket number for this rule) 
and then click ``Search.'' Follow the instructions on the Web site for 
submitting comments.
    2. U.S. mail, courier, or hand delivery: Executive Secretariat--
FOIA regulations, Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street NW., 
Washington, DC 20240.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Cafaro, Office of Executive 
Secretariat and Regulatory Affairs, 202-208-5342.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Why We're Publishing This Proposed Rule and What It Does

    In late 2012, the Department published a final rule updating and 
replacing the Department's previous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 
regulations. In early 2016, the Department updated that final rule, 
primarily to authorize the Office of Inspector General (OIG) to process 
their own FOIA appeals. On June 30, 2016, the FOIA Improvement Act of 
2016, Pub. L. 114-185, 130 Stat. 538 (the Act) was enacted. The Act 
specifically requires all agencies to review and update their FOIA 
regulations in accordance with its provisions, and the Department is 
making changes to its regulations accordingly. Finally, the Department 
has received feedback from its FOIA practitioners and requesters and 
identified areas where it would be possible to further update, clarify, 
and streamline the language of some procedural provisions. Therefore, 
the Department is proposing to make the following changes:
     Section 2.4(e) would be amended to provide additional 
guidance on how bureaus handle misdirected requests.
     Section 2.15 would be amended to bring attention to the 
Department's existing FOIA Request Tracking Tool (https://foia.doi.gov/requeststatus).
     Section 2.19 would be amended to bring further attention 
to the services provided by the Office of Government Information 
Services (OGIS), in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
     Section 2.21 would be amended to reflect that the OGIS 
would be defined earlier in the regulations than it previously had 
been.
     Section 2.24 would be amended to require a foreseeable 
harm analysis, in accordance with the provisions of the Act, and to 
require bureaus to provide an explanation to the requester when an 
estimate of the volume of any records withheld in full or in part is 
not provided.

[[Page 64402]]

     Section 2.37(f) would be amended to reflect the provisions 
of the Act.
     Section 2.39 would be amended to remove what would be 
superfluous language, after the changes to section 2.37(f).
     Section 2.58 would be amended to provide more time for 
requesters to appeal, in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

II. Compliance With Laws and Executive Orders

1. Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)

    Executive Order (E.O) 12866 provides that the Office of Information 
and Regulatory Affairs will review all significant rules. The Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rulemaking 
is not significant.
    Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while 
calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote 
predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most 
innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. 
The Executive Order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches 
that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for 
the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and 
consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further 
that regulations must be based on the best available science and that 
the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open 
exchange of ideas. We have developed this proposed rule in a manner 
consistent with these requirements.

2. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department of the Interior certifies that this rulemaking will 
not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small 
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

3. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    This is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule:
    a. Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or 
more.
    b. Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for 
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government 
agencies, or geographic regions.
    c. Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, 
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of 
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.

4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This rulemaking does not impose an unfunded mandate on State, 
local, or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 
million per year. This rulemaking does not have a significant or unique 
effect on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. A 
statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required.

5. Takings (E.O. 12630)

    In accordance with Executive Order 12630, this rulemaking does not 
have significant takings implications. A takings implication assessment 
is not required.

6. Federalism (E.O. 13132)

    In accordance with Executive Order 13132, this proposed rule does 
not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation 
of a federalism summary impact statement. It would not substantially 
and directly affect the relationship between the Federal and state 
governments. A federalism summary impact statement is not required.

7. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)

    In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Office of the 
Solicitor has determined that this rulemaking does not unduly burden 
the judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 
3(b)(2) of the Executive Order.

8. Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 13175)

    Under the criteria in Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated this 
proposed rule and determined that it has no potential effects on 
federally recognized Indian tribes. This rulemaking does not have 
tribal implications that impose substantial direct compliance costs on 
Indian Tribal governments.

9. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule does not contain information collection 
requirements, and a submission to the Office of Management and Budget 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act is not required.

10. National Environmental Policy Act

    This rulemaking does not constitute a major Federal action 
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. A 
detailed statement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. (NEPA), is not required. Pursuant to 43 CFR 
46.205(b) and 43 CFR 46.210(i), the Department of the Interior NEPA 
implementing procedures exclude from preparation of an environmental 
assessment or impact statement ``[p]olicies, directives, regulations, 
and guidelines: that are of an administrative, financial, legal, 
technical, or procedural nature. . . .'' None of the extraordinary 
circumstances listed in 43 CFR 46.215 exists for this rulemaking. 
Accordingly, this proposed rule is categorically excluded from 
environmental analysis under 43 CFR 46.210(i).

11. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 13211)

    This rulemaking is not a significant energy action under the 
definition in Executive Order 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is 
not required. This rulemaking will not have a significant effect on the 
nation's energy supply, distribution, or use.

12. Clarity of This Proposed Regulation

    We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the 
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain 
language. This means that each rule we publish must:

    (a) Be logically organized;
    (b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
    (c) Use clear language rather than jargon;
    (d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
    (e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.

    If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us 
comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To 
better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as 
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections 
or paragraphs that you find unclear, which sections or sentences are 
too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, 
etc.

13. Public Availability of Comments

    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or 
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be 
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying 
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can 
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying 
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be 
able to do so.

[[Page 64403]]

List of Subjects in 43 CFR Part 2

    Freedom of information.

Kristen J. Sarri,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management, and 
Budget.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of the 
Interior proposes to amend part 2 of title 43 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations as follows:

PART 2--FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT; RECORDS AND TESTIMONY

0
1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a, 553; 31 U.S.C. 3717; 43 
U.S.C. 1460, 1461.

Subpart B--How to Make a Request

0
2. In Sec.  2.4, revise paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  2.4   Does where you send your request affect its processing?

* * * * *
    (e) If your request is received by a bureau that believes it is not 
the appropriate bureau to process your request, the bureau that 
received your request will attempt to contact you (if possible, via 
telephone or email) to confirm that you deliberately sent your request 
to that bureau for processing. If you do not confirm this, the bureau 
will deem your request misdirected and route the misdirected request to 
the appropriate bureau to respond under the basic time limit outlined 
in Sec.  2.17 of this part.
* * * * *

Subpart D--Timing of Responses to Requests


Sec.  2.15   [Amended]

0
3. In Sec.  2.15, add paragraph (g) to read as follows:


Sec.  2.15  What is multitrack processing and how does it affect your 
request?

* * * * *
    (g) You may track the status of your request, including its 
estimated processing completion date, at https://foia.doi.gov/requeststatus/.


Sec.  2.19   [Amended]

0
4. In Sec.  2.19(b)(2), add the words ``, and notify you of your right 
to seek dispute resolution from the Office of Government Information 
Services (OGIS)'' after the words ``you and the bureau''.

Subpart E--Responses to Requests


Sec.  2.21   [Amended]

0
 5. In Sec.  2.21(a), the second sentence, remove the words ``Office of 
Government Information Services (OGIS)'' and add in their place ``the 
OGIS''.


Sec.  2.24   [Amended]

0
 6. Amend Sec.  2.24 by:
    a. In paragraph (b)(3), adding the words ``, along with a statement 
that the bureau reasonably foresees that disclosure would harm an 
interest protected by the applied exemption(s) or disclosure is 
prohibited by law'' after the words ``or in part''; and
    b. In paragraph (b)(4), adding the word ``including'' after the 
word ``unless'' and adding the words ``and the bureau explains this 
harm to you'' after the words ``withhold the records''.

Subpart G--Fees


Sec.  2.37   [Amended]

0
7. In Sec.  2.37, revise paragraph (f) to read as follows:


Sec.  2.37   What general principles govern fees?

* * * * *
    (f) If the bureau does not comply with any time limit in the FOIA:
    (1) Except as provided in paragraph (f)(2) of this section, the 
bureau cannot assess any search fees (or, if you are in the fee 
category of a representative of the news media or an educational and 
noncommercial scientific institution, duplication fees).
    (2)(i) If the bureau has determined that unusual circumstances 
apply (as the term is defined in Sec.  2.70 of this part) and the 
bureau provided you a timely written notice to extend the basic time 
limit in accordance with Sec.  2.19 of this part, the noncompliance is 
excused for an additional 10 calendar days. If the bureau fails to 
comply with the extended time limit, the bureau may not assess any 
search fees (or, if you are in the fee category of a representative of 
the news media or an educational and noncommercial scientific 
institution, duplication fees).
    (ii) If the bureau has determined that unusual circumstances apply 
and more than 5,000 pages are necessary to respond to the request, the 
noncompliance is excused if, in accordance with Sec.  2.19 of this 
part, the bureau has provided you a timely written notice and has 
discussed with you via written mail, email, or telephone (or made not 
less than 3 good-faith attempts to do so) how you could effectively 
limit the scope of the request.
    (iii) If a court has determined that exceptional circumstances 
exist (as that term is defined in Sec.  2.70 of this part), the 
noncompliance is excused for the length of time provided by the court 
order.
* * * * *


Sec.  2.39   [Amended]

0
 8. In Sec.  2.39, remove the paragraph (a) designation and remove 
paragraph (b).

Subpart H--Administrative Appeals


Sec.  2.58   [Amended]

0
9. In Sec.  2.58(a) and (b), remove the number ``30'' and add in its 
place the number ``90''.
[FR Doc. 2016-22166 Filed 9-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4334-63-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.