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