Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of Exemptions; Department of Homeland Security U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement-007 Criminal History and Immigration Verification (CHIVe) System of Records, 20240-20242 [2019-09598]
Download as PDF
20240
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 90 / Thursday, May 9, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. Therefore, no actions were
deemed necessary under the provisions
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995.
■
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as
defined by § 251 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (as amended), 5 U.S.C. 804. This
rule will not result in an annual effect
on the economy of $100,000,000 or
more; a major increase in costs or prices;
or significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of United States-based
companies to compete with foreign
based companies in domestic and
export markets.
(a)* * *
Minority Institutions (MIs) means an
institution of higher education whose
enrollment of a single minority or a
combination of minorities (minority
meaning American Indian, Alaskan
Native, Black (not of Hispanic origin),
Hispanic (including persons of Mexican,
Puerto Rican, Cuban, and Central or
South American origin), Pacific Islander
or other ethnic group under-represented
in science and engineering.) exceeds 50
percent of the total enrollment, as
defined by section 365(3) of the Higher
Education Act (HEA) (20 U.S.C.
1067k(3)).
*
*
*
*
*
List of Subjects in 2 CFR Part 1800
Grant programs, Grants
administration.
For reasons set forth in the preamble,
NASA amends 2 CFR part 1800 as
follows:
6. Amend § 1800.11, in paragraph (a)
by revising the definition of ‘‘Minority
Institutions (MIs)’’ to read as follows:
§ 1800.11
Subpart B—Pre-Federal Award
Requirements and Contents of Federal
Awards
7. Revise § 1800.208 to read as
follows:
§ 1800.208 Certifications and
representations.
1. The authority citation for part 1800
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 51 U.S.C. 20113(e), Pub. L. 97–
258, 96 Stat. 1003 (31 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.),
and 2 CFR part 200.
§ 1800.3
[Amended]
§ 1800.5
[Amended]
3. Amend § 1800.5 by adding the
acronym ‘‘(GCAM)’’ after the words
‘‘Grants and Cooperative Agreements
Manual’’.
■
8. Revise § 1800.210 to read as
follows:
■
NASA waives the requirement for the
inclusion of indirect cost rates on any
notice of Federal award for commercial
firms with no cost sharing requirement.
The terms and conditions for NASA
may be found in Exhibit D of the GCAM.
https://prod.nais.nasa.gov/pub/pub_
library/srba.
■
§ 1800.6
The certifications and representations
for NASA may be found in Exhibit C of
the GCAM. https://prod.nais.nasa.gov/
pub/pub_library/srba.
§ 1800.210 Information contained in a
Federal award.
2. Amend § 1800.3, paragraph (d)(2)
by removing the words ‘‘Procurement,
Program Operations’’ and add in their
place ‘‘the Chief Financial Officer,
Policy’’.
■
Subpart C—Post Federal Award
Requirements
[Removed and Reserved]
4. Remove and reserve § 1800.6.
9. Revise § 1800.339 to read as
follows:
■
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES
Subpart A—Acronyms and Definitions
5. Amend § 1800.10 by adding in
alphabetical order an entry for ‘‘GCAM
Grants and Cooperative Agreements
Manual’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 1800.339
§ 1800.10
NASA reserves the ability to
terminate a Federal award in accordance
with § 200.338 through § 200.342 and as
set forth in section D21 of the GCAM.
Acronyms.
*
*
*
*
*
GCAM Grants and Cooperative
Agreements Manual
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:58 May 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
Termination.
Appendix A to Part 1800 [Removed]
■
10. Remove appendix A to part 1800.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
■
11. Remove appendix B to part 1800.
Cheryl E. Parker,
NASA Federal Register Liaison Officer.
Definitions
■
PART 1800—UNIFORM
ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS,
COST PRINCIPLES, AND AUDIT
REQUIREMENTS FOR FEDERAL
AWARDS
Appendix B to Part 1800 [Removed]
Sfmt 4700
[FR Doc. 2019–09569 Filed 5–8–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
6 CFR Part 5
[Docket No. DHS–2018–0075]
Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of
Exemptions; Department of Homeland
Security U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement-007 Criminal
History and Immigration Verification
(CHIVe) System of Records
Office of the Secretary,
Department of Homeland Security.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) is issuing a final rule to
amend its regulations to exempt
portions of an updated and reissued
system of records titled, ‘‘Department of
Homeland Security/Immigration and
Customs Enforcement-007 Criminal
History and Immigration Verification
(CHIVe) System of Records’’ from
certain provisions of the Privacy Act.
Specifically, the Department exempts
portions of this system of records from
one or more provisions of the Privacy
Act because of criminal, civil, and
administrative enforcement
requirements.
DATES: This final rule is effective May 9,
2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
general questions please contact: Jordan
Holz, (202–732–3300), Acting Privacy
Officer, U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, Washington, DC 20536.
For privacy issues please contact:
Jonathan R. Cantor (202–343–1717),
Acting Chief Privacy Officer, Privacy
Office, Department of Homeland
Security, Washington, DC 20528.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Background
The Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
in the Federal Register (83 FR 20738,
May 8, 2018) proposing to exempt
portions of DHS/ICE–007 Criminal
History and Immigration Verification
(CHIVe) System of Records from one or
more provisions of the Privacy Act
because of criminal, civil, and
E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM
09MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 90 / Thursday, May 9, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
administrative enforcement
requirements. This system of records
was published concurrently in the
Federal Register (83 FR 20844, May 8,
2018), and comments were invited on
both the NPRM and SORN.
PART 5—DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS
AND INFORMATION
1. The authority citation for part 5
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; Pub. L.
107–296, 116 Stat. 2135; 5 U.S.C. 301.
Subpart A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552.
Subpart B also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a.
II. Public Comments
DHS received six comments on the
NPRM and 92 on the SORN.
2. Amend appendix C to part 5 by
adding paragraph 80 to read as follows:
■
NPRM and SORN
DHS has reviewed the six comments
received for the NPRM and the 92
comments for the SORN. Because the
comments submitted for both the SORN
and NPRM were similar in nature, DHS
has summarized them based on the
nature of the comment. The comments
primarily discussed the following:
• Objecting to the Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS)
using immigration status as a factor in
granting or denying an application for a
potential Unaccompanied Alien Child
(UAC) sponsor;
• Objecting to ICE’s involvement in
the UAC sponsor screening process by
collecting information on potential UAC
sponsors and other adult members of
those sponsors’ households,
determining these individuals’
immigration statuses, and sharing that
information with HHS;
• Stating that this new process is not
in the best interests of the child, and
that children will be denied sponsors
who could provide suitable living
environments; and
• Objecting to the potential
separation of families, when this would
not be in the best interests of the child.
These comments pertain to ICE’s
involvement in the UAC sponsor
screening process. In this process, ICE
shares very limited information with
HHS for a discrete purpose. Under its
legal authority, ICE shares immigration
status and limited criminal history
information with HHS to inform an HHS
determination whether to grant or deny
a UAC sponsorship application.
Though this process involves the
sharing of information, the comments
received do not pertain to the Privacy
Act exemptions proposed by DHS in
this rulemaking. Therefore, DHS will
implement the rulemaking as proposed.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES
List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5
Freedom of information, Privacy.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, DHS amends chapter I of title
6, Code of Federal Regulations, as
follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:58 May 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
Appendix C to Part 5—DHS Systems of
Records Exempt From the Privacy Act
*
*
*
*
*
80. The DHS/ICE–007 Criminal History
and Immigration Verification (CHIVe) System
of Records consists of electronic and paper
records and will be used by DHS and its
components. The CHIVe System of Records
is a repository of information held by DHS
in connection with its several and varied
missions and functions, including the
enforcement of civil and criminal laws;
investigations, inquiries, and proceedings
thereunder; and national security and
intelligence activities. The CHIVe System of
Records contains information that is
collected by, on behalf of, in support of, or
in cooperation with DHS and its components
and may contain personally identifiable
information collected by other federal, state,
local, tribal, foreign, or international
government agencies. The Secretary of
Homeland Security, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552a(j)(2), has exempted this system from the
following provisions of the Privacy Act: 5
U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (c)(4); (d); (e)(1), (e)(2),
(e)(3), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I), (e)(5),
(e)(8); (f); and (g). Additionally, the Secretary
of Homeland Security, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552a(k)(2), has exempted this system from
the following provisions of the Privacy Act:
5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1), (e)(4)(G),
(e)(4)(H); and (f). Exemptions from these
particular subsections are justified, on a caseby-case basis to be determined at the time a
request is made, for the following reasons:
(a) From subsection (c)(3) and (4)
(Accounting for Disclosures) because release
of the accounting of disclosures could alert
the subject of an investigation of an actual or
potential criminal, civil, or regulatory
violation to the existence of that investigation
and reveal investigative interest on the part
of DHS as well as the recipient agency.
Disclosure of the accounting would therefore
present a serious impediment to law
enforcement efforts and/or efforts to preserve
national security. Disclosure of the
accounting would also permit the individual
who is the subject of a record to impede the
investigation, to tamper with witnesses or
evidence, and to avoid detection or
apprehension, which would undermine the
entire investigative process. Information on a
completed investigation may be withheld
and exempt from disclosure if the fact that
an investigation occurred remains sensitive
after completion.
(b) From subsection (d) (Access and
Amendment to Records) because access to
the records contained in this system of
records could inform the subject of an
investigation of an actual or potential
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
20241
criminal, civil, or regulatory violation to the
existence of that investigation and reveal
investigative interest on the part of DHS or
another agency. Access to the records could
permit the individual who is the subject of
a record to impede the investigation, to
tamper with witnesses or evidence, and to
avoid detection or apprehension.
Amendment of the records could interfere
with ongoing investigations and law
enforcement activities and would impose an
unreasonable administrative burden by
requiring investigations to be continually
reinvestigated. In addition, permitting access
and amendment to such information could
disclose security-sensitive information that
could be detrimental to homeland security.
(c) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and
Necessity of Information) because in the
course of investigations into potential
violations of federal law, the accuracy of
information obtained or introduced
occasionally may be unclear, or the
information may not be strictly relevant or
necessary to a specific investigation. In the
interests of effective law enforcement, it is
appropriate to retain all information that may
aid in establishing patterns of unlawful
activity.
(d) From subsection (e)(2) (Collection of
Information from Individuals) because
requiring that information be collected from
the subject of an investigation would alert the
subject to the nature or existence of the
investigation, thereby interfering with that
investigation and related law enforcement
activities.
(e) From subsection (e)(3) (Notice to
Subjects) because providing such detailed
information could impede law enforcement
by compromising the existence of a
confidential investigation or reveal the
identity of witnesses or confidential
informants.
(f) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H),
and (e)(4)(I) (Agency Requirements) and (f)
(Agency Rules), because portions of this
system are exempt from the individual access
provisions of subsection (d) for the reasons
noted above, and therefore DHS is not
required to establish requirements, rules, or
procedures with respect to such access.
Providing notice to individuals with respect
to existence of records pertaining to them in
the system of records or otherwise setting up
procedures pursuant to which individuals
may access and view records pertaining to
themselves in the system would undermine
investigative efforts and reveal the identities
of witnesses, and potential witnesses, and
confidential informants.
(g) From subsection (e)(5) (Collection of
Information) because with the collection of
information for law enforcement purposes, it
is impossible to determine in advance what
information is accurate, relevant, timely, and
complete. Compliance with subsection (e)(5)
would preclude DHS agents from using their
investigative training and exercise of good
judgment to both conduct and report on
investigations.
(h) From subsection (e)(8) (Notice on
Individuals) because compliance would
interfere with DHS’s ability to obtain, serve,
and issue subpoenas, warrants, and other law
enforcement mechanisms that may be filed
E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM
09MYR1
20242
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 90 / Thursday, May 9, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
under seal and could result in disclosure of
investigative techniques, procedures, and
evidence.
(j) From subsection (g) (Civil Remedies) to
the extent that the system is exempt from
other specific subsections of the Privacy Act.
Jonathan R. Cantor,
Acting Chief Privacy Officer, Department of
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2019–09598 Filed 5–8–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–28–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2018–0703; Product
Identifier 2018–NM–007–AD; Amendment
39–19630; AD 2019–08–09]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for all The
Boeing Company Model 747–8 and 747–
8F series airplanes. This AD was
prompted by reports of damaged vapor
seals, block seals, and heat shield seals
on the outboard pylons between the
engine strut and aft fairing. This AD
requires installing new aft fairing vapor
seals, heatshield seals, heatshield seal
retainers, block seals, and outboard
lateral restraint access panels. We are
issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.
DATES: This AD is effective June 13,
2019.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of a certain publication listed in this AD
as of June 13, 2019.
ADDRESSES: For service information
identified in this final rule, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes,
Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC
110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740–5600;
telephone 562–797–1717; internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You
may view this service information at the
FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195.
It is also available on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA–2018–
0703.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:58 May 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2018–
0703; or in person at Docket Operations
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The AD docket contains this final rule,
the regulatory evaluation, any
comments received, and other
information. The address for Docket
Operations (phone: 800–647–5527) is
U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M–30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher Baker, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Section, FAA, Seattle ACO
Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206–
231–3552; email: Christopher.R.Baker@
faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would
apply to all The Boeing Company Model
747–8 and 747–8F series airplanes. The
NPRM published in the Federal
Register on August 3, 2018 (83 FR
38096). The NPRM was prompted by
reports of damaged vapor seals, block
seals, and heat shield seals on the
outboard pylons between the engine
strut and aft fairing. The NPRM
proposed to require installing new aft
fairing vapor seals, heatshield seals,
heatshield seal retainers, block seals,
and outboard lateral restraint access
panels.
We are issuing this AD to address heat
damage to the vapor seals between the
engine strut and aft fairing. Such
damage could allow flammable fluid
leakage out of the aft fairing, which
could result in an uncontrolled fire in
the engine strut.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to
participate in developing this final rule.
The following presents the comments
received on the NPRM and the FAA’s
response to each comment.
Request To Review Airplane
Maintenance Records in Lieu of an
Inspection
United Parcel Service (UPS) requested
that operators be allowed to perform a
records review to determine if the
affected part number is installed in lieu
of performing an inspection. UPS stated
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
that the records review will provide an
equivalent level of safety. UPS stated
that in accordance with paragraph (g)(2)
of the proposed AD, it would be
required to inspect all Model 747–8F
airplanes within 4 years or 4,800 flight
cycles after the AD effective date,
whichever occurs first.
We agree with the commenter’s
request that a review of the airplane
maintenance records is acceptable in
lieu of an inspection if the part number
of the part can be conclusively
determined from that review. We have
revised paragraph (g)(2) of this AD
accordingly.
Request To Revise the Line Numbers in
the Applicability Paragraph
Boeing requested we revise the
proposed AD to address airplanes only
specified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747–54A2247, dated August 3,
2017, line numbers (L/Ns) 1420 through
1540, instead of all 747–8 and 747–8F
series airplanes as specified in
paragraph (c), ‘‘Applicability,’’ of the
proposed AD.
Boeing stated that airplanes not
identified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747–54A2247, dated August 3,
2017, L/Ns 1541 and on, were built and
delivered from the Boeing factory with
the correct parts. Boeing commented
that the factory utilizes the approved
Boeing Production System to maintain
configuration control of the airplanes
through delivery, and that the
remainder of the Model 747–8 fleet is
covered by Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747–54A2247, dated August 3,
2017.
We disagree with the commenter’s
request. As we stated in the ‘‘Differences
Between this Proposed AD and the
Service Information’’ of the NPRM, the
applicability in this AD does not refer
to paragraph l. A., ‘‘Effectivity,’’ of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–
54A2247, dated August 3, 2017. The
service information does not contain a
comprehensive list of the airplanes
affected by the identified unsafe
condition because the spare parts
identified in paragraph (j) of this AD
have been determined to be rotable parts
that are capable of being installed on all
Model 747–8 and 747–8F series
airplanes. Therefore, the applicability of
this AD is all Model 747–8 and 747–8F
series airplanes.
Additionally, there is the potential for
previously delivered Model 747–8 and
747–8F airplanes having the affected
spare parts installed during a repair of
the aft fairing. Delivered airplanes with
line numbers 1541 and on could have
been exposed to the affected parts
between delivery and as of the effective
E:\FR\FM\09MYR1.SGM
09MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 90 (Thursday, May 9, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20240-20242]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-09598]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
6 CFR Part 5
[Docket No. DHS-2018-0075]
Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of Exemptions; Department of
Homeland Security U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement-007 Criminal
History and Immigration Verification (CHIVe) System of Records
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Homeland Security.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is issuing a final
rule to amend its regulations to exempt portions of an updated and
reissued system of records titled, ``Department of Homeland Security/
Immigration and Customs Enforcement-007 Criminal History and
Immigration Verification (CHIVe) System of Records'' from certain
provisions of the Privacy Act. Specifically, the Department exempts
portions of this system of records from one or more provisions of the
Privacy Act because of criminal, civil, and administrative enforcement
requirements.
DATES: This final rule is effective May 9, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general questions please contact:
Jordan Holz, (202-732-3300), Acting Privacy Officer, U.S. Immigration
and Customs Enforcement, Washington, DC 20536. For privacy issues
please contact: Jonathan R. Cantor (202-343-1717), Acting Chief Privacy
Officer, Privacy Office, Department of Homeland Security, Washington,
DC 20528.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) in the Federal Register (83 FR 20738, May 8, 2018) proposing to
exempt portions of DHS/ICE-007 Criminal History and Immigration
Verification (CHIVe) System of Records from one or more provisions of
the Privacy Act because of criminal, civil, and
[[Page 20241]]
administrative enforcement requirements. This system of records was
published concurrently in the Federal Register (83 FR 20844, May 8,
2018), and comments were invited on both the NPRM and SORN.
II. Public Comments
DHS received six comments on the NPRM and 92 on the SORN.
NPRM and SORN
DHS has reviewed the six comments received for the NPRM and the 92
comments for the SORN. Because the comments submitted for both the SORN
and NPRM were similar in nature, DHS has summarized them based on the
nature of the comment. The comments primarily discussed the following:
Objecting to the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS) using immigration status as a factor in granting or denying an
application for a potential Unaccompanied Alien Child (UAC) sponsor;
Objecting to ICE's involvement in the UAC sponsor
screening process by collecting information on potential UAC sponsors
and other adult members of those sponsors' households, determining
these individuals' immigration statuses, and sharing that information
with HHS;
Stating that this new process is not in the best interests
of the child, and that children will be denied sponsors who could
provide suitable living environments; and
Objecting to the potential separation of families, when
this would not be in the best interests of the child.
These comments pertain to ICE's involvement in the UAC sponsor
screening process. In this process, ICE shares very limited information
with HHS for a discrete purpose. Under its legal authority, ICE shares
immigration status and limited criminal history information with HHS to
inform an HHS determination whether to grant or deny a UAC sponsorship
application.
Though this process involves the sharing of information, the
comments received do not pertain to the Privacy Act exemptions proposed
by DHS in this rulemaking. Therefore, DHS will implement the rulemaking
as proposed.
List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5
Freedom of information, Privacy.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DHS amends chapter I of
title 6, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 5--DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS AND INFORMATION
0
1. The authority citation for part 5 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; Pub. L. 107-296, 116 Stat.
2135; 5 U.S.C. 301.
Subpart A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552.
Subpart B also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a.
0
2. Amend appendix C to part 5 by adding paragraph 80 to read as
follows:
Appendix C to Part 5--DHS Systems of Records Exempt From the Privacy
Act
* * * * *
80. The DHS/ICE-007 Criminal History and Immigration
Verification (CHIVe) System of Records consists of electronic and
paper records and will be used by DHS and its components. The CHIVe
System of Records is a repository of information held by DHS in
connection with its several and varied missions and functions,
including the enforcement of civil and criminal laws;
investigations, inquiries, and proceedings thereunder; and national
security and intelligence activities. The CHIVe System of Records
contains information that is collected by, on behalf of, in support
of, or in cooperation with DHS and its components and may contain
personally identifiable information collected by other federal,
state, local, tribal, foreign, or international government agencies.
The Secretary of Homeland Security, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2),
has exempted this system from the following provisions of the
Privacy Act: 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (c)(4); (d); (e)(1), (e)(2),
(e)(3), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I), (e)(5), (e)(8); (f); and
(g). Additionally, the Secretary of Homeland Security, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), has exempted this system from the following
provisions of the Privacy Act: 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1),
(e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H); and (f). Exemptions from these particular
subsections are justified, on a case-by-case basis to be determined
at the time a request is made, for the following reasons:
(a) From subsection (c)(3) and (4) (Accounting for Disclosures)
because release of the accounting of disclosures could alert the
subject of an investigation of an actual or potential criminal,
civil, or regulatory violation to the existence of that
investigation and reveal investigative interest on the part of DHS
as well as the recipient agency. Disclosure of the accounting would
therefore present a serious impediment to law enforcement efforts
and/or efforts to preserve national security. Disclosure of the
accounting would also permit the individual who is the subject of a
record to impede the investigation, to tamper with witnesses or
evidence, and to avoid detection or apprehension, which would
undermine the entire investigative process. Information on a
completed investigation may be withheld and exempt from disclosure
if the fact that an investigation occurred remains sensitive after
completion.
(b) From subsection (d) (Access and Amendment to Records)
because access to the records contained in this system of records
could inform the subject of an investigation of an actual or
potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation to the existence
of that investigation and reveal investigative interest on the part
of DHS or another agency. Access to the records could permit the
individual who is the subject of a record to impede the
investigation, to tamper with witnesses or evidence, and to avoid
detection or apprehension. Amendment of the records could interfere
with ongoing investigations and law enforcement activities and would
impose an unreasonable administrative burden by requiring
investigations to be continually reinvestigated. In addition,
permitting access and amendment to such information could disclose
security-sensitive information that could be detrimental to homeland
security.
(c) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and Necessity of
Information) because in the course of investigations into potential
violations of federal law, the accuracy of information obtained or
introduced occasionally may be unclear, or the information may not
be strictly relevant or necessary to a specific investigation. In
the interests of effective law enforcement, it is appropriate to
retain all information that may aid in establishing patterns of
unlawful activity.
(d) From subsection (e)(2) (Collection of Information from
Individuals) because requiring that information be collected from
the subject of an investigation would alert the subject to the
nature or existence of the investigation, thereby interfering with
that investigation and related law enforcement activities.
(e) From subsection (e)(3) (Notice to Subjects) because
providing such detailed information could impede law enforcement by
compromising the existence of a confidential investigation or reveal
the identity of witnesses or confidential informants.
(f) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), and (e)(4)(I) (Agency
Requirements) and (f) (Agency Rules), because portions of this
system are exempt from the individual access provisions of
subsection (d) for the reasons noted above, and therefore DHS is not
required to establish requirements, rules, or procedures with
respect to such access. Providing notice to individuals with respect
to existence of records pertaining to them in the system of records
or otherwise setting up procedures pursuant to which individuals may
access and view records pertaining to themselves in the system would
undermine investigative efforts and reveal the identities of
witnesses, and potential witnesses, and confidential informants.
(g) From subsection (e)(5) (Collection of Information) because
with the collection of information for law enforcement purposes, it
is impossible to determine in advance what information is accurate,
relevant, timely, and complete. Compliance with subsection (e)(5)
would preclude DHS agents from using their investigative training
and exercise of good judgment to both conduct and report on
investigations.
(h) From subsection (e)(8) (Notice on Individuals) because
compliance would interfere with DHS's ability to obtain, serve, and
issue subpoenas, warrants, and other law enforcement mechanisms that
may be filed
[[Page 20242]]
under seal and could result in disclosure of investigative
techniques, procedures, and evidence.
(j) From subsection (g) (Civil Remedies) to the extent that the
system is exempt from other specific subsections of the Privacy Act.
Jonathan R. Cantor,
Acting Chief Privacy Officer, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2019-09598 Filed 5-8-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-28-P