Disclosure of Records and Information Regulations; Technical Amendment, 11829-11830 [2020-02943]
Download as PDF
11829
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 85, No. 40
Friday, February 28, 2020
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
designate the appellate authority as the
Associate General Counsel (General
Law), this technical amendment updates
the regulations to reflect that the
appellate authority is the Office of
General Counsel or its designee.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents.
II. Regulatory History
DHS did not publish a notice of
proposed rulemaking for this rule.
Under Title 5 of the United States Code
(U.S.C.), Section 553(b)(A), this final
rule is exempt from notice and public
comment rulemaking requirements
because the change involves rules of
agency organization, procedure, or
practice. In addition, under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B), an agency may waive the
notice and comment requirements if it
finds, for good cause, that notice and
comment is impracticable, unnecessary,
or contrary to the public interest. DHS
finds that notice and comment is
unnecessary under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
because the change of the named
appellate authority is an agency
procedural update that will have no
substantive effect on the public. For the
same reasons, DHS finds that good
cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for
making this final rule effective
immediately upon publication.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
6 CFR Part 5
[Docket No. DHS–2020–0003]
Disclosure of Records and Information
Regulations; Technical Amendment
DHS, Privacy Office.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of Homeland
Security (‘‘DHS’’) is updating its
regulations related to the procedures for
disclosure of records information under
the Privacy Act. Specifically, DHS is
updating its regulations to state that the
DHS Office of the General Counsel or its
designee is the authorized appeals
authority with respect to requests made
under the Privacy Act.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
February 28, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information about this document call
Jonathan R. Cantor, Chief Privacy
Officer (Acting), telephone 202–343–
1717.
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
I. Discussion of the Rule
The Department of Homeland
Security (‘‘DHS’’) is updating its
regulations to state that the DHS Office
of the General Counsel or its designee is
the authorized appeals authority with
respect to requests made under the
Privacy Act.1 Pursuant to the Privacy
Act, DHS promulgated regulations
implementing procedures for processing
requests made by an individual
regarding records or information
pertaining to that individual. See 5
U.S.C. 552a(f); 6 CFR 5.20–5.36. The
regulations provide for appeals within
the agency after initial adverse
determinations. See 5 U.S.C. 552a(f)(4);
33 CFR 5.24, 5.25, 5.26, 5.27. In all
instances where these regulations
1 See
5 U.S.C. 552a; 6 CFR 5.20–5.36.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:45 Feb 27, 2020
Jkt 250001
III. Regulatory Analyses
DHS considered numerous statutes
and executive orders related to
rulemaking when developing this rule.
Below are summarized analyses based
on these statutes or executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory
Planning and Review) and 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review) direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). Executive Order 13563
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of
reducing costs, of harmonizing rules,
and of promoting flexibility. Executive
Order 13771 (Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs) directs
agencies to reduce regulation and
control regulatory costs and provides
that ‘‘for every one new regulation
issued, at least two prior regulations be
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
identified for elimination, and that the
cost of planned regulations be prudently
managed and controlled through a
budgeting process.’’
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has not designated this rule a
significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it.
Because this rule is not a significant
regulatory action, this rule is exempt
from the requirements of Executive
Order 13771. See the OMB
Memorandum titled ‘‘Guidance
Implementing Executive Order 13771,
titled ‘Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs’ ’’ (April 5,
2017). This rule involves nonsubstantive changes and internal agency
practices and procedures; it will not
impose any additional costs on the
public. The benefit of the nonsubstantive change that updates internal
agency procedures is increased clarity
and accuracy of regulations for the
public.
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
5 U.S.C. 601–612, DHS has considered
whether this rule would have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises
small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
This rule is not preceded by a notice
of proposed rulemaking. Therefore, it is
exempt from the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601–612). The Regulatory Flexibility
Act does not apply when notice and
comment rulemaking is not required.
This rule consists of a technical
amendment to internal agency
procedures and does not have any
substantive effect on the regulated
industry or small businesses.
C. Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection
of information under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520.
D. Environment
DHS reviews proposed actions to
determine whether the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
E:\FR\FM\28FER1.SGM
28FER1
11830
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
applies to them and if so what degree of
analysis is required. DHS Directive 023–
01 Rev. 01 (Directive) and Instruction
Manual 023–01–001–01 Rev. 01
(Instruction Manual) establish the
procedures that DHS and its
components use to comply with NEPA
and the Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) regulations for
implementing NEPA, 40 CFR parts 1500
through 1508.
The CEQ regulations allow federal
agencies to establish, with CEQ review
and concurrence, categories of actions
(‘‘categorical exclusions’’) which
experience has shown do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment and, therefore, do not
require an Environmental Assessment
(EA) or Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS). 40 CFR 1507.3(b)(2)(ii),
1508.4. For an action to be categorically
excluded, it must satisfy each of the
following three conditions: (1) The
entire action clearly fits within one or
more of the categorical exclusions; (2)
the action is not a piece of a larger
action; and (3) no extraordinary
circumstances exist that create the
potential for a significant environmental
effect. Instruction Manual section
V.B(2)(a)–(c).
This rule is a technical amendment
that updates internal agency procedures.
Specifically, the amendment updates
the designated appeals authority for
requests made under the Privacy Act.
Therefore, it clearly fits within
categorical exclusion A3(a)
‘‘Promulgation of rules . . . of a strictly
administrative or procedural nature.’’
Instruction Manual, Appendix A, Table
1. Furthermore, the rule is not part of a
larger action and presents no
extraordinary circumstances creating
the potential for significant
environmental impacts. Therefore, the
amendment is categorically excluded
from further NEPA review.
List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5
Classified information, Courts,
Freedom of information, Government
employees, Privacy.
For the reason stated in the preamble,
DHS amends 6 CFR part 5 as follows:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:45 Feb 27, 2020
Jkt 250001
§ 5.24
[Amended]
2. In § 5.24, remove, ‘‘Associate
General Counsel (General Law)’’ and
add, in its place, ‘‘DHS Office of the
General Counsel or its designee’’.
■
§ 5.25
[Amended]
3. In § 5.25, amend paragraphs (a) and
(b) by removing, ‘‘Associate General
Counsel (General Law)’’ and adding in
its place, ‘‘DHS Office of the General
Counsel or its designee’’.
■
§ 5.26
[Amended]
4. In § 5.26(c), remove ‘‘Associate
General Counsel (General Law)’’ and
add in its place, ‘‘DHS Office of the
General Counsel or its designee’’.
■
§ 5.27
[Amended]
5. In § 5.27(c), remove ‘‘Associate
General Counsel (General Law)’’ and
addin its place ‘‘DHS Office of the
General Counsel or its designee’’.
■
Jonathan R. Cantor,
Chief Privacy Officer (Acting), Department
of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2020–02943 Filed 2–27–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 930
[Doc. No. AMS–SC–19–0091; SC19–930–3
FR]
Tart Cherries Grown in the States of
Michigan, et al.; Decreased
Assessment Rate
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This rule implements a
recommendation from the Cherry
Industry Administrative Board (Board)
to decrease the assessment rate
established for the 2019–20 and
subsequent fiscal years. The assessment
rate will remain in effect indefinitely
unless modified, suspended, or
terminated.
SUMMARY:
DATES:
Effective March 30, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennie M. Varela, Marketing Specialist,
or Christian D. Nissen, Regional
Director, Southeast Marketing Field
Office, Marketing Order and Agreement
Division, Specialty Crops Program,
AMS, USDA; Telephone: (863) 324–
3375, Fax: (863) 291–8614, or Email:
Jennie.Varela@usda.gov or
Christian.Nissen@usda.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Small businesses may request
information on complying with this
regulation by contacting Richard Lower,
Marketing Order and Agreement
Division, Specialty Crops Program,
AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence
Avenue SW, STOP 0237, Washington,
DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720–
2491, Fax: (202)720–8938, or Email:
Richard.Lower@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
action, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553,
amends regulations issued to carry out
a marketing order as defined in 7 CFR
900.2(j). This rule is issued under
Marketing Agreement and Order No.
930, both as amended (7 CFR part 930),
regulating the handling of tart cherries
produced in the states of Michigan, New
York, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Utah,
Washington, and Wisconsin. Part 930
(referred to as the ‘‘Order’’) is effective
under the Agricultural Marketing
Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7
U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter referred to
as the ‘‘Act.’’ The Board locally
administers the Order and is comprised
of producers and handlers of tart
cherries operating within the
production area, and a public member.
The Department of Agriculture
(USDA) is issuing this rule in
conformance with Executive Orders
13563 and 13175. This action falls
within a category of regulatory actions
that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) exempted from Executive
Order 12866 review. Additionally,
because this rule does not meet the
definition of a significant regulatory
action, it does not trigger the
requirements contained in Executive
Order 13771. See OMB’s Memorandum
titled ‘‘Interim Guidance Implementing
Section 2 of the Executive Order of
January 30, 2017, titled ‘Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs’ ’’ (February 2, 2017).
This rule has been reviewed under
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. Under the Order now in effect,
tart cherry handlers are subject to
assessments. Funds to administer the
Order are derived from such
assessments. It is intended that the
assessment rate will be applicable to all
assessable tart cherries for the 2019–20
crop year and continue until amended,
suspended, or terminated.
The Act provides that administrative
proceedings must be exhausted before
parties may file suit in court. Under
section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any
handler subject to an order may file
with USDA a petition stating that the
order, any provision of the order, or any
obligation imposed in connection with
the order is not in accordance with law
E:\FR\FM\28FER1.SGM
28FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 40 (Friday, February 28, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11829-11830]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-02943]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 85 , No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2020 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 11829]]
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
6 CFR Part 5
[Docket No. DHS-2020-0003]
Disclosure of Records and Information Regulations; Technical
Amendment
AGENCY: DHS, Privacy Office.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Security (``DHS'') is updating its
regulations related to the procedures for disclosure of records
information under the Privacy Act. Specifically, DHS is updating its
regulations to state that the DHS Office of the General Counsel or its
designee is the authorized appeals authority with respect to requests
made under the Privacy Act.
DATES: This final rule is effective on February 28, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this document
call Jonathan R. Cantor, Chief Privacy Officer (Acting), telephone 202-
343-1717.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Discussion of the Rule
The Department of Homeland Security (``DHS'') is updating its
regulations to state that the DHS Office of the General Counsel or its
designee is the authorized appeals authority with respect to requests
made under the Privacy Act.\1\ Pursuant to the Privacy Act, DHS
promulgated regulations implementing procedures for processing requests
made by an individual regarding records or information pertaining to
that individual. See 5 U.S.C. 552a(f); 6 CFR 5.20-5.36. The regulations
provide for appeals within the agency after initial adverse
determinations. See 5 U.S.C. 552a(f)(4); 33 CFR 5.24, 5.25, 5.26, 5.27.
In all instances where these regulations designate the appellate
authority as the Associate General Counsel (General Law), this
technical amendment updates the regulations to reflect that the
appellate authority is the Office of General Counsel or its designee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 5 U.S.C. 552a; 6 CFR 5.20-5.36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Regulatory History
DHS did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking for this rule.
Under Title 5 of the United States Code (U.S.C.), Section 553(b)(A),
this final rule is exempt from notice and public comment rulemaking
requirements because the change involves rules of agency organization,
procedure, or practice. In addition, under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), an
agency may waive the notice and comment requirements if it finds, for
good cause, that notice and comment is impracticable, unnecessary, or
contrary to the public interest. DHS finds that notice and comment is
unnecessary under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) because the change of the named
appellate authority is an agency procedural update that will have no
substantive effect on the public. For the same reasons, DHS finds that
good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making this final rule
effective immediately upon publication.
III. Regulatory Analyses
DHS considered numerous statutes and executive orders related to
rulemaking when developing this rule. Below are summarized analyses
based on these statutes or executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review) direct agencies to assess
the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. Executive Order 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs) directs agencies to reduce regulation and control
regulatory costs and provides that ``for every one new regulation
issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination,
and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and
controlled through a budgeting process.''
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this
rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it. Because this rule is
not a significant regulatory action, this rule is exempt from the
requirements of Executive Order 13771. See the OMB Memorandum titled
``Guidance Implementing Executive Order 13771, titled `Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' '' (April 5, 2017). This
rule involves non-substantive changes and internal agency practices and
procedures; it will not impose any additional costs on the public. The
benefit of the non-substantive change that updates internal agency
procedures is increased clarity and accuracy of regulations for the
public.
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, DHS has
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
This rule is not preceded by a notice of proposed rulemaking.
Therefore, it is exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612). The Regulatory Flexibility Act does
not apply when notice and comment rulemaking is not required. This rule
consists of a technical amendment to internal agency procedures and
does not have any substantive effect on the regulated industry or small
businesses.
C. Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.
D. Environment
DHS reviews proposed actions to determine whether the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
[[Page 11830]]
applies to them and if so what degree of analysis is required. DHS
Directive 023-01 Rev. 01 (Directive) and Instruction Manual 023-01-001-
01 Rev. 01 (Instruction Manual) establish the procedures that DHS and
its components use to comply with NEPA and the Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementing NEPA, 40 CFR parts 1500
through 1508.
The CEQ regulations allow federal agencies to establish, with CEQ
review and concurrence, categories of actions (``categorical
exclusions'') which experience has shown do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and,
therefore, do not require an Environmental Assessment (EA) or
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). 40 CFR 1507.3(b)(2)(ii), 1508.4.
For an action to be categorically excluded, it must satisfy each of the
following three conditions: (1) The entire action clearly fits within
one or more of the categorical exclusions; (2) the action is not a
piece of a larger action; and (3) no extraordinary circumstances exist
that create the potential for a significant environmental effect.
Instruction Manual section V.B(2)(a)-(c).
This rule is a technical amendment that updates internal agency
procedures. Specifically, the amendment updates the designated appeals
authority for requests made under the Privacy Act. Therefore, it
clearly fits within categorical exclusion A3(a) ``Promulgation of rules
. . . of a strictly administrative or procedural nature.'' Instruction
Manual, Appendix A, Table 1. Furthermore, the rule is not part of a
larger action and presents no extraordinary circumstances creating the
potential for significant environmental impacts. Therefore, the
amendment is categorically excluded from further NEPA review.
List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5
Classified information, Courts, Freedom of information, Government
employees, Privacy.
For the reason stated in the preamble, DHS amends 6 CFR part 5 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.
Sec. 5.24 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 5.24, remove, ``Associate General Counsel (General Law)''
and add, in its place, ``DHS Office of the General Counsel or its
designee''.
Sec. 5.25 [Amended]
0
3. In Sec. 5.25, amend paragraphs (a) and (b) by removing, ``Associate
General Counsel (General Law)'' and adding in its place, ``DHS Office
of the General Counsel or its designee''.
Sec. 5.26 [Amended]
0
4. In Sec. 5.26(c), remove ``Associate General Counsel (General Law)''
and add in its place, ``DHS Office of the General Counsel or its
designee''.
Sec. 5.27 [Amended]
0
5. In Sec. 5.27(c), remove ``Associate General Counsel (General Law)''
and addin its place ``DHS Office of the General Counsel or its
designee''.
Jonathan R. Cantor,
Chief Privacy Officer (Acting), Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2020-02943 Filed 2-27-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P