Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation, 51611-51614 [2022-17977]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 162 / Tuesday, August 23, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Fiscal Service
Office of the Secretary
31 CFR Part 285
32 CFR Part 310
[Docket ID: DoD–2021–OS–0048]
[Docket No. Fiscal–2021–0007]
RIN 0790–AL13
RIN 1530–AA21
Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation
Debt Collection Authorities Under the
Debt Collection Improvement Act of
1996; Correction
AGENCY:
Bureau of the Fiscal Service,
Fiscal Service, Treasury.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Final rule; correction.
The Department of the
Treasury (‘‘Treasury’’), Bureau of the
Fiscal Service (‘‘Fiscal Service’’) is
correction a final rule that appeared in
the Federal Register on August 16,
2022. The document amends the
regulations of the Treasury, Fiscal
Service, regarding the Treasury Offset
Program (‘‘TOP’’) and the CrossServicing program. The primary reason
for amending the regulation is to inform
the public about how Fiscal Service will
use Social Security numbers in
mailings, as required by the Social
Security Number Fraud Prevention Act
of 2017, which requires Fiscal Service to
have final regulations in place by
September 15, 2022.
This correction is effective
September 15, 2022.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tawanna Edmonds, Director,
Receivables Management & Debt
Services Division, Debt Management
Services, Bureau of the Fiscal Service at
(202) 874–6810.
In FR Doc.
2022–17117 appearing on page 52046 in
the Federal Register of Tuesday, August
16, 2022, the following correction is
made:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[Corrected]
1. On page 50249, in the first column,
the first line of instruction 7, ‘‘Section
285.12(a) is amended by:’’, is corrected
to read ‘‘Section 285.12 is amended by:’’
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
■
Dated: August 17, 2022.
Lela Anderson,
Attorney-Advisor.
[FR Doc. 2022–18076 Filed 8–22–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–AS–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:35 Aug 22, 2022
Jkt 256001
The Department of Defense
(Department or DoD) is issuing a final
rule to amend its regulations to exempt
portions of the system of records titled
DoD–0008, ‘‘Freedom of Information
Act and Privacy Act Records,’’ from
certain provisions of the Privacy Act of
1974.
DATES: This rule is effective September
22, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Rahwa Keleta, Privacy and Civil
Liberties Division, Directorate for
Privacy, Civil Liberties and Freedom of
Information, Office of the Assistant to
the Secretary of Defense for Privacy,
Civil Liberties, and Transparency,
Department of Defense, 4800 Mark
Center Drive, Mailbox #24, Suite 08D09,
Alexandria, VA 22350–1700;
OSD.DPCLTD@mail.mil; (703) 571–
0070.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
SUMMARY:
§ 285.12
Office of the Secretary of
Defense (OSD), Department of Defense
(DoD).
ACTION: Final rule.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The proposed rule published in the
Federal Register (86 FR 72536–72540)
on December 22, 2021. Comments were
accepted for 60 days until February 22,
2022. A total of two comments regarding
the proposed rule were received. Please
see a summary of the comments and the
Department’s response below:
DoD received one substantive
comment and one non-substantive
comment on the NPRM. The substantive
comment expressed a concern that the
application of exemptions to this system
of records would globally shield all
FOIA case processing records from
disclosure. This rulemaking would not
globally or improperly shield a
requester’s ability to seek access to the
case processing of records of a FOIA or
Privacy Act case. The Privacy Act (5
U.S.C. 552a) generally provides that any
person has a right (enforceable in court)
of access to federal agency records about
themselves, except to the extent that the
information is protected from disclosure
by one of ten exemptions. To the extent
that the case processing records are
‘‘records’’ as defined in the Privacy Act
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
51611
to which an individual has a Privacy
Act right of access, this rule will deny
the individual access to those records
only to the extent a claimed exemption
applies. In addition, records in the
DoD–0008 Freedom of Information Act
and Privacy Act Records system of
records are only exempt from the
Privacy Act to the extent the purposes
underlying the exemption pertain to the
record. Applying Privacy Act
exemptions allows agencies to withhold
records from access for particular
reasons as articulated by the exemption
rule. Having considered the public
comment, the Department will
implement the rulemaking as proposed.
I. Background
In finalizing this rule, DoD is seeking
to exempt portions of this system of
records titled, DoD–0008 Freedom of
Information Act and Privacy Act
Records, from certain provisions of the
Privacy Act. This system of records
covers DoD’s maintenance of records
about individuals who submit access
requests and administrative appeals
under the Freedom of Information Act,
and who submit access and amendment
requests and administrative appeals
under the Privacy Act. This system of
records data includes information
regarding the individual requesters and
their attorneys or representatives, the
original request for access and any
administrative appeal, and other
supporting documentation to include
related memoranda, correspondence,
notes, and, in some instances, copies of
requested records and records under
administrative appeal.
II. Privacy Exemption
The Privacy Act permits Federal
agencies to exempt eligible records in a
system of records from certain
provisions of the Act, including the
provisions providing individuals with a
right to request access to and
amendment of their own records and
accountings of disclosures of such
records. If an agency intends to exempt
a particular system of records, it must
first go through the rulemaking process
to provide public notice and an
opportunity to comment on the
proposed exemption. The OSD is
amending 32 CFR part 310 to add a new
Privacy Act exemption rule for this
system of records. The DoD is adding an
exemption for this system of records
because some of its records may contain
investigatory material compiled for law
enforcement purposes, classified
national security information, protective
services information pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 3056, and testing or examination
information pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
51612
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 162 / Tuesday, August 23, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
552a(j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(3), (k)(5),
(k)(6), and (k)(7). The DoD is claiming
an exemption from several provisions of
the Privacy Act, including various
access, amendment, disclosure of
accounting, and certain recordkeeping
and notice requirements, to avoid,
among other harms, frustrating the
underlying purposes for which the
information was gathered.
require DoD to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis.
Regulatory Analysis
Section 202, Public Law 104–4,
‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ and Executive
Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation
and Regulatory Review’’
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distribute impacts, and equity).
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. It has been determined that
this rule is not a significant regulatory
action under these Executive Orders.
Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. DoD will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States. A major rule may take effect no
earlier than 60 calendar days after
Congress receives the rule report or the
rule is published in the Federal
Register, whichever is later. This rule is
not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory
Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6)
18:35 Aug 22, 2022
Jkt 256001
It has been determined that this rule
does not impose additional information
collection requirements on the public
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
(2 U.S.C. 1532) requires agencies to
assess anticipated costs and benefits
before issuing any rule whose mandates
may result in the expenditure by State,
local and tribal governments in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, in
any one year of $100 million in 1995
dollars, updated annually for inflation.
This rule will not mandate any
requirements for State, local, or tribal
governments, nor will it affect private
sector costs.
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’
It has been determined that this rule
does not have federalism implications.
This rule does not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the National
Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
Executive Order 13175, ‘‘Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments’’
Executive Order 13175 establishes
certain requirements that an agency
must meet when it promulgates a final
rule that imposes substantial direct
compliance costs on one or more Indian
tribes, preempts tribal law, or effects the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the federal
government and Indian tribes. This rule
will not have a substantial effect on
Indian tribal governments.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 310
The Assistant to the Secretary of
Defense for Privacy, Civil Liberties, and
Transparency certified that this rule is
not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601) because it would not,
if promulgated, have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This rule is
concerned only with the administration
of Privacy Act systems of records within
the DoD. Therefore, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, as amended, does not
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork
Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 310 is
amended as follows:
PART 310—PROTECTION OF PRIVACY
AND ACCESS TO AND AMENDEMENT
OF INDIVIDUAL RECORDS UNDER
THE PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR
part 310 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
2. Section 310.13 is amended by
adding paragraph (e)(7) to read as
follows:
■
§ 310.13 Exemptions for DoD-wide
systems.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(7) System identifier and name: DoD–
0008, ‘‘Freedom of Information Act and
Privacy Act Records’’
(i) Exemptions. This system of records
is exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and
(4); (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4); (e)(1); (e)(2);
(e)(3); (e)(4)(G), (H), and(I); (e)(5); (e)(8);
(f) and (g).
(ii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2),
(k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(3), (k)(5), (k)(6), and
(k)(7).
(iii) Exemption from the particular
subsections. Exemption from the
particular subsections is justified for the
following reasons:
(A) Subsection (c)(3), (d)(1), and
(d)(2)—(1) Exemption (j)(2). Records in
this system of records may contain
information recompiled from other
systems of records maintained by a DoD
component or other agency which
performs as its principal function
activities pertaining to the enforcement
of criminal laws and contain
investigatory material compiled for
criminal law enforcement purposes,
including information identifying
criminal offenders and alleged
offenders, information compiled for the
purpose of criminal investigation, or
reports compiled during criminal law
enforcement proceedings. Application
of exemption (j)(2) may be necessary
because access to, amendment of, or
release of the accounting of disclosures
of such records could inform the record
subject of an investigation of the
existence, nature, or scope of an actual
or potential law enforcement or
disciplinary investigation, and thereby
seriously impede law enforcement or
prosecutorial efforts by permitting the
record subject and other persons to
whom he might disclose the records to
avoid criminal penalties or disciplinary
measures; reveal confidential sources
who might not have otherwise come
forward to assist in an investigation and
thereby hinder DoD or the other
agency’s ability to obtain information
from future confidential sources and
result in an unwarranted invasion of the
privacy of others. Amendment of such
records could also impose a highly
impracticable administrative burden by
requiring investigations to be
continuously reinvestigated.
(2) Exemption (k)(1). Records in this
system of records may contain
information that is properly classified
pursuant to executive order.
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 162 / Tuesday, August 23, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
Application of exemption (k)(1) may be
necessary because access to and
amendment of the records, or release of
the accounting of disclosures for such
records, could reveal classified
information. Disclosure of classified
records to an individual may cause
damage to national security.
(3) Exemption (k)(2). Records in this
system of records may contain
information recompiled from other
systems of records pertaining to
investigatory material compiled for law
enforcement purposes other than
material within the scope of 5 U.S.C.
552a(j)(2). Application of exemption
(k)(2) may be necessary because access
to, amendment of, or release of the
accounting of disclosures of such
records could: inform the record subject
of an investigation of the existence,
nature, or scope of an actual or potential
law enforcement or disciplinary
investigation, and thereby seriously
impede law enforcement or
prosecutorial efforts by permitting the
record subject and other persons to
whom he might disclose the records or
the accounting of records to avoid
criminal penalties, civil remedies, or
disciplinary measures; interfere with a
civil or administrative action or
investigation by allowing the subject to
tamper with witnesses or evidence, and
to avoid detection or apprehension,
which may undermine the entire
investigatory process; reveal
confidential sources who might not
have otherwise come forward to assist
in an investigation and thereby hinder
DoD’s ability to obtain information from
future confidential sources; and result
in an unwarranted invasion of the
privacy of others. Amendment of such
records could also impose a highly
impracticable administrative burden by
requiring investigations to be
continuously reinvestigated.
(4) Exemption (k)(3). Records in this
system of records may contain
information recompiled from other
systems of records pertaining to
providing protective services to the
President of the United States or other
individuals pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3056.
Application of exemption (k)(3) for such
records may be necessary because
access to, amendment of, or release of
the accounting of disclosures of such
records could compromise the
effectiveness of protective services, the
safety of the individuals protected
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3056, and the
safety of the personnel providing
protective services.
(5) Exemption (k)(5). Records in this
system of records may contain
information recompiled from other
systems of records concerning
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:35 Aug 22, 2022
Jkt 256001
investigatory material compiled solely
for determining suitability, eligibility,
and qualifications for Federal civilian
employment, military service, Federal
contracts, or access to classified
information. In some cases, such records
may contain information pertaining to
the identity of a source who furnished
information to the Government under an
express promise that the source’s
identity would be held in confidence (or
prior to the effective date of the Privacy
Act, under an implied promise).
Application of exemption (k)(5) may be
necessary because access to, amendment
of, or release of the accounting of
disclosures of such records could
identify these confidential sources who
might not have otherwise come forward
to assist the Government; hinder the
Government’s ability to obtain
information from future confidential
sources; and result in an unwarranted
invasion of the privacy of others.
Amendment of such records could also
impose a highly impracticable
administrative burden by requiring
investigations to be continuously
reinvestigated.
(6) Exemption (k)(6). Records in this
system of records may contain
information recompiled from other
systems of records relating to testing or
examination material used solely to
determine individual qualifications for
appointment or promotion in the
Federal service. Application of
exemption (k)(6) may be necessary
when access to and amendment of the
records, or release of the accounting of
disclosure for such records, may
compromise the objectivity and fairness
of the testing or examination process.
Amendment of such records could also
impose a highly impracticable
administrative burden by requiring
testing and examinations to be
continuously re-administered.
(7) Exemption (k)(7). Records in this
system of records may contain
evaluation material recompiled from
other systems of records used to
determine potential for promotion in the
Armed Forces of the United States. In
some cases, such records may contain
information pertaining to the identity of
a source who furnished information to
the Government under an express
promise that the source’s identity would
be held in confidence (or prior to the
effective date of the Privacy Act, under
an implied promise). Application of
exemption (k)(7) may be necessary
because access to, amendment of, or
release of the accounting of disclosures
of such records could identify these
confidential sources who might not
have otherwise come forward to assist
the Government; hinder the
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
51613
Government’s ability to obtain
information from future confidential
sources; and result in an unwarranted
invasion of the privacy of others.
(B) Subsection (c)(4), (d)(3) and (4).
These subsections are inapplicable to
the extent that an exemption is being
claimed from subsections (d)(1) and (2).
(C) Subsection (e)(1). In the collection
of information for investigatory or law
enforcement purposes, it is not always
possible to conclusively determine the
relevance and necessity of particular
information in the early stages of the
investigation or adjudication. In some
instances, it will be only after the
collected information is evaluated in
light of other information that its
relevance and necessity for effective
investigation and adjudication can be
assessed. Collection of such information
permits more informed decision-making
by the Department when making
required disciplinary and prosecutorial
determinations. Additionally, records
within this system may be properly
classified pursuant to executive order.
Further, it is not always possible to
determine relevancy or necessity of
specific information in the earlier stages
of responding to a FOIA or Privacy Act
request or in litigation case
development, including with respect to
records pertaining to suitability
determinations or armed services
promotion evaluations that contain
information about sources who were
granted an express promise of
confidentiality, or pertaining to testing
or examination material used solely to
determine individual qualifications for
appointment or promotion in the
Federal service, the disclosure of which
would compromise the objectivity or
fairness of the testing or examination
process. Such information may later be
deemed unnecessary upon further
assessment. Accordingly, application of
exemptions (j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(3),
(k)(5), (k)(6), or (k)(7) may be necessary.
(D) Subsection (e)(2). To collect
information from the subject individual
could serve notice that he or she is the
subject of a criminal investigation and
thereby present a serious impediment to
such investigations. Collection of
information only from the individual
accused of criminal activity or
misconduct could also subvert
discovery of relevant evidence and
subvert the course of justice.
Accordingly, application of exemption
(j)(2) may be necessary.
(E) Subsection (e)(3). To inform
individuals as required by this
subsection could reveal the existence of
a criminal investigation and
compromise investigative efforts.
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
51614
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 162 / Tuesday, August 23, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
Accordingly, application of exemption
(j)(2) may be necessary.
(F) Subsections (e)(4)(G) and (H).
These subsections are inapplicable to
the extent an exemption is claimed from
subsections (d)(1) and (2).
(G) Subsection (e)(4)(I). To the extent
that this provision is construed to
require more detailed disclosure than
the broad information currently
published in the system notice
concerning categories of sources of
records in the system, an exemption
from this provision is necessary to
protect the confidentiality of sources of
information, the privacy and physical
safety of witnesses and informants, and
testing or examination material used
solely to determine individual
qualifications for appointment of
promotion in the Federal service.
Accordingly, application of exemptions
(j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(5), (k)(6), and
(k)(7) may be necessary.
(H) Subsection (e)(5). It is often
impossible to determine in advance if
investigatory records contained in this
system are accurate, relevant, timely
and complete, but, in the interests of
effective law enforcement, it is
necessary to retain this information to
maintain an accurate record of the
investigatory activity to preserve the
integrity of the investigation and satisfy
various Constitutional and evidentiary
requirements, such as mandatory
disclosure of potentially exculpatory
information in the investigative file to a
defendant. It is also necessary to retain
this information to aid in establishing
patterns of activity and provide
investigative leads. With the passage of
time, seemingly irrelevant or untimely
information may acquire new
significance as further investigation
brings new details to light and the
accuracy of such information can only
be determined through judicial
processes. Accordingly, application of
exemption (j)(2) may be necessary.
(I) Subsection (e)(8). To serve notice
could give persons sufficient warning to
evade investigative efforts. Accordingly,
application of exemption (j)(2) may be
necessary.
(J) Subsection (f). To the extent that
portions of the system are exempt from
the provisions of the Privacy Act
concerning individual access and
amendment of records, DoD is not
required to establish rules concerning
procedures and requirements relating to
such provisions. Accordingly,
application of exemptions (j)(2), (k)(1),
(k)(2), (k)(5), (k)(6), and (k)(7) may be
necessary.
(K) Subsection (g). This subsection is
inapplicable to the extent that the
system is exempt from other specific
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:35 Aug 22, 2022
Jkt 256001
subsections of the Privacy Act to which
the civil remedies provisions pertain.
(iv) Exempt records from other
systems. In the course of carrying out
the overall purpose for this system,
exempt records from other systems of
records may in turn become part of the
records maintained in this system. To
the extent that copies of exempt records
from those other systems of records are
maintained in this system, the DoD
claims the same exemptions for the
records from those other systems that
are entered into this system, as claimed
for the prior system(s) of which they are
a part, provided the reason for the
exemption remains valid and necessary.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: August 16, 2022.
Aaron T. Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2022–17977 Filed 8–22–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 541
[Docket No. NHTSA–2022–0012]
RIN 2127–AM41
Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Final Listing of 2020 Light
Duty Truck Lines Subject to the
Requirements of This Standard and
Exempted Vehicle Lines for Model Year
2020
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), U.S.
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule announces
NHTSA’s determination that there are
no new model year 2020 light duty
truck lines subject to the parts-marking
requirements of the Federal motor
vehicle theft prevention standard. The
agency determined no new models were
high-theft or had major parts that are
interchangeable with a majority of the
covered major parts of passenger car or
multipurpose passenger vehicle lines.
This final rule also identifies those
vehicle lines that have been granted an
exemption from the parts-marking
requirements because they are equipped
with antitheft devices determined to
meet certain criteria.
DATES: This final rule is effective August
23, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Carlita Ballard, Office of International
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer
Programs, NHTSA, West Building,
W43–439, NRM–310, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Ms.
Ballard’s phone number is (202) 366–
5222. Her fax number is (202) 493–2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The theft
prevention standard (49 CFR part 541)
applies to (1) all passenger car lines; (2)
all multipurpose passenger vehicle
(MPV) lines with a gross vehicle weight
rating (GVWR) of 6,000 pounds or less;
(3) low-theft light-duty truck (LDT) lines
with a GVWR of 6,000 pounds or less
that have major parts that are
interchangeable with a majority of the
covered major parts of passenger car or
MPV lines; and (4) high-theft LDT lines
with a GVWR of 6,000 pounds or less.
The purpose of the theft prevention
standard is to reduce the incidence of
motor vehicle theft by facilitating the
tracing and recovery of parts from stolen
vehicles. The standard seeks to facilitate
such tracing by requiring that vehicle
identification numbers (VINs), VIN
derivative numbers, or other symbols be
placed on major component vehicle
parts. The theft prevention standard
requires motor vehicle manufacturers to
inscribe or affix VINs onto covered
original equipment major component
parts, and to inscribe or affix a symbol
identifying the manufacturer and a
common symbol identifying the
replacement component parts for those
original equipment parts, on all vehicle
lines subject to the requirements of the
standard.
49 U.S.C. 33104(d) provides that once
a line has become subject to the theft
prevention standard, the line remains
subject to the requirements of the
standard unless it is exempted under 49
U.S.C. 33106. Section 33106 provides
that a manufacturer may petition
annually to have one vehicle line
exempted from the requirements of
section 33104, if the line is equipped
with an antitheft device meeting certain
conditions as standard equipment. The
exemption is granted if NHTSA
determines that the antitheft device is
likely to be as effective as compliance
with the theft prevention standard in
reducing and deterring motor vehicle
thefts.
49 CFR part 543 establishes the
process through which manufacturers
may seek an exemption from the theft
prevention standard. Manufacturers
may request an exemption under 49
CFR 543.6 by providing specific
information about the antitheft device,
its capabilities, and the reasons the
petitioner believes the device to be as
effective at reducing and deterring theft
as compliance with the parts-marking
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 23, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51611-51614]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17977]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 310
[Docket ID: DoD-2021-OS-0048]
RIN 0790-AL13
Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), Department of Defense
(DoD).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Defense (Department or DoD) is issuing a
final rule to amend its regulations to exempt portions of the system of
records titled DoD-0008, ``Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act
Records,'' from certain provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974.
DATES: This rule is effective September 22, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Rahwa Keleta, Privacy and Civil
Liberties Division, Directorate for Privacy, Civil Liberties and
Freedom of Information, Office of the Assistant to the Secretary of
Defense for Privacy, Civil Liberties, and Transparency, Department of
Defense, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Mailbox #24, Suite 08D09, Alexandria,
VA 22350-1700; [email protected]; (703) 571-0070.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The proposed rule published in the Federal Register (86 FR 72536-
72540) on December 22, 2021. Comments were accepted for 60 days until
February 22, 2022. A total of two comments regarding the proposed rule
were received. Please see a summary of the comments and the
Department's response below:
DoD received one substantive comment and one non-substantive
comment on the NPRM. The substantive comment expressed a concern that
the application of exemptions to this system of records would globally
shield all FOIA case processing records from disclosure. This
rulemaking would not globally or improperly shield a requester's
ability to seek access to the case processing of records of a FOIA or
Privacy Act case. The Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) generally provides
that any person has a right (enforceable in court) of access to federal
agency records about themselves, except to the extent that the
information is protected from disclosure by one of ten exemptions. To
the extent that the case processing records are ``records'' as defined
in the Privacy Act to which an individual has a Privacy Act right of
access, this rule will deny the individual access to those records only
to the extent a claimed exemption applies. In addition, records in the
DoD-0008 Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Records system of
records are only exempt from the Privacy Act to the extent the purposes
underlying the exemption pertain to the record. Applying Privacy Act
exemptions allows agencies to withhold records from access for
particular reasons as articulated by the exemption rule. Having
considered the public comment, the Department will implement the
rulemaking as proposed.
I. Background
In finalizing this rule, DoD is seeking to exempt portions of this
system of records titled, DoD-0008 Freedom of Information Act and
Privacy Act Records, from certain provisions of the Privacy Act. This
system of records covers DoD's maintenance of records about individuals
who submit access requests and administrative appeals under the Freedom
of Information Act, and who submit access and amendment requests and
administrative appeals under the Privacy Act. This system of records
data includes information regarding the individual requesters and their
attorneys or representatives, the original request for access and any
administrative appeal, and other supporting documentation to include
related memoranda, correspondence, notes, and, in some instances,
copies of requested records and records under administrative appeal.
II. Privacy Exemption
The Privacy Act permits Federal agencies to exempt eligible records
in a system of records from certain provisions of the Act, including
the provisions providing individuals with a right to request access to
and amendment of their own records and accountings of disclosures of
such records. If an agency intends to exempt a particular system of
records, it must first go through the rulemaking process to provide
public notice and an opportunity to comment on the proposed exemption.
The OSD is amending 32 CFR part 310 to add a new Privacy Act exemption
rule for this system of records. The DoD is adding an exemption for
this system of records because some of its records may contain
investigatory material compiled for law enforcement purposes,
classified national security information, protective services
information pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3056, and testing or examination
information pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
[[Page 51612]]
552a(j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(3), (k)(5), (k)(6), and (k)(7). The DoD
is claiming an exemption from several provisions of the Privacy Act,
including various access, amendment, disclosure of accounting, and
certain recordkeeping and notice requirements, to avoid, among other
harms, frustrating the underlying purposes for which the information
was gathered.
Regulatory Analysis
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' and Executive
Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review''
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distribute impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. It has been determined that this rule is not a significant
regulatory action under these Executive Orders.
Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. DoD will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States. A
major rule may take effect no earlier than 60 calendar days after
Congress receives the rule report or the rule is published in the
Federal Register, whichever is later. This rule is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Public Law 96-354, ``Regulatory Flexibility Act'' (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6)
The Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Privacy, Civil
Liberties, and Transparency certified that this rule is not subject to
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601) because it would not, if
promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities. This rule is concerned only with the administration
of Privacy Act systems of records within the DoD. Therefore, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended, does not require DoD to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis.
Public Law 96-511, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been determined that this rule does not impose additional
information collection requirements on the public under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Section 202, Public Law 104-4, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act''
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2
U.S.C. 1532) requires agencies to assess anticipated costs and benefits
before issuing any rule whose mandates may result in the expenditure by
State, local and tribal governments in the aggregate, or by the private
sector, in any one year of $100 million in 1995 dollars, updated
annually for inflation. This rule will not mandate any requirements for
State, local, or tribal governments, nor will it affect private sector
costs.
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism''
It has been determined that this rule does not have federalism
implications. This rule does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the National Government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.
Executive Order 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments''
Executive Order 13175 establishes certain requirements that an
agency must meet when it promulgates a final rule that imposes
substantial direct compliance costs on one or more Indian tribes,
preempts tribal law, or effects the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the federal government and Indian tribes. This
rule will not have a substantial effect on Indian tribal governments.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 310
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 310 is amended as follows:
PART 310--PROTECTION OF PRIVACY AND ACCESS TO AND AMENDEMENT OF
INDIVIDUAL RECORDS UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
0
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 310 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a.
0
2. Section 310.13 is amended by adding paragraph (e)(7) to read as
follows:
Sec. 310.13 Exemptions for DoD-wide systems.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(7) System identifier and name: DoD-0008, ``Freedom of Information
Act and Privacy Act Records''
(i) Exemptions. This system of records is exempt from 5 U.S.C.
552a(c)(3) and (4); (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4); (e)(1); (e)(2); (e)(3);
(e)(4)(G), (H), and(I); (e)(5); (e)(8); (f) and (g).
(ii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(3),
(k)(5), (k)(6), and (k)(7).
(iii) Exemption from the particular subsections. Exemption from the
particular subsections is justified for the following reasons:
(A) Subsection (c)(3), (d)(1), and (d)(2)--(1) Exemption (j)(2).
Records in this system of records may contain information recompiled
from other systems of records maintained by a DoD component or other
agency which performs as its principal function activities pertaining
to the enforcement of criminal laws and contain investigatory material
compiled for criminal law enforcement purposes, including information
identifying criminal offenders and alleged offenders, information
compiled for the purpose of criminal investigation, or reports compiled
during criminal law enforcement proceedings. Application of exemption
(j)(2) may be necessary because access to, amendment of, or release of
the accounting of disclosures of such records could inform the record
subject of an investigation of the existence, nature, or scope of an
actual or potential law enforcement or disciplinary investigation, and
thereby seriously impede law enforcement or prosecutorial efforts by
permitting the record subject and other persons to whom he might
disclose the records to avoid criminal penalties or disciplinary
measures; reveal confidential sources who might not have otherwise come
forward to assist in an investigation and thereby hinder DoD or the
other agency's ability to obtain information from future confidential
sources and result in an unwarranted invasion of the privacy of others.
Amendment of such records could also impose a highly impracticable
administrative burden by requiring investigations to be continuously
reinvestigated.
(2) Exemption (k)(1). Records in this system of records may contain
information that is properly classified pursuant to executive order.
[[Page 51613]]
Application of exemption (k)(1) may be necessary because access to and
amendment of the records, or release of the accounting of disclosures
for such records, could reveal classified information. Disclosure of
classified records to an individual may cause damage to national
security.
(3) Exemption (k)(2). Records in this system of records may contain
information recompiled from other systems of records pertaining to
investigatory material compiled for law enforcement purposes other than
material within the scope of 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2). Application of
exemption (k)(2) may be necessary because access to, amendment of, or
release of the accounting of disclosures of such records could: inform
the record subject of an investigation of the existence, nature, or
scope of an actual or potential law enforcement or disciplinary
investigation, and thereby seriously impede law enforcement or
prosecutorial efforts by permitting the record subject and other
persons to whom he might disclose the records or the accounting of
records to avoid criminal penalties, civil remedies, or disciplinary
measures; interfere with a civil or administrative action or
investigation by allowing the subject to tamper with witnesses or
evidence, and to avoid detection or apprehension, which may undermine
the entire investigatory process; reveal confidential sources who might
not have otherwise come forward to assist in an investigation and
thereby hinder DoD's ability to obtain information from future
confidential sources; and result in an unwarranted invasion of the
privacy of others. Amendment of such records could also impose a highly
impracticable administrative burden by requiring investigations to be
continuously reinvestigated.
(4) Exemption (k)(3). Records in this system of records may contain
information recompiled from other systems of records pertaining to
providing protective services to the President of the United States or
other individuals pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3056. Application of exemption
(k)(3) for such records may be necessary because access to, amendment
of, or release of the accounting of disclosures of such records could
compromise the effectiveness of protective services, the safety of the
individuals protected pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3056, and the safety of the
personnel providing protective services.
(5) Exemption (k)(5). Records in this system of records may contain
information recompiled from other systems of records concerning
investigatory material compiled solely for determining suitability,
eligibility, and qualifications for Federal civilian employment,
military service, Federal contracts, or access to classified
information. In some cases, such records may contain information
pertaining to the identity of a source who furnished information to the
Government under an express promise that the source's identity would be
held in confidence (or prior to the effective date of the Privacy Act,
under an implied promise). Application of exemption (k)(5) may be
necessary because access to, amendment of, or release of the accounting
of disclosures of such records could identify these confidential
sources who might not have otherwise come forward to assist the
Government; hinder the Government's ability to obtain information from
future confidential sources; and result in an unwarranted invasion of
the privacy of others. Amendment of such records could also impose a
highly impracticable administrative burden by requiring investigations
to be continuously reinvestigated.
(6) Exemption (k)(6). Records in this system of records may contain
information recompiled from other systems of records relating to
testing or examination material used solely to determine individual
qualifications for appointment or promotion in the Federal service.
Application of exemption (k)(6) may be necessary when access to and
amendment of the records, or release of the accounting of disclosure
for such records, may compromise the objectivity and fairness of the
testing or examination process. Amendment of such records could also
impose a highly impracticable administrative burden by requiring
testing and examinations to be continuously re-administered.
(7) Exemption (k)(7). Records in this system of records may contain
evaluation material recompiled from other systems of records used to
determine potential for promotion in the Armed Forces of the United
States. In some cases, such records may contain information pertaining
to the identity of a source who furnished information to the Government
under an express promise that the source's identity would be held in
confidence (or prior to the effective date of the Privacy Act, under an
implied promise). Application of exemption (k)(7) may be necessary
because access to, amendment of, or release of the accounting of
disclosures of such records could identify these confidential sources
who might not have otherwise come forward to assist the Government;
hinder the Government's ability to obtain information from future
confidential sources; and result in an unwarranted invasion of the
privacy of others.
(B) Subsection (c)(4), (d)(3) and (4). These subsections are
inapplicable to the extent that an exemption is being claimed from
subsections (d)(1) and (2).
(C) Subsection (e)(1). In the collection of information for
investigatory or law enforcement purposes, it is not always possible to
conclusively determine the relevance and necessity of particular
information in the early stages of the investigation or adjudication.
In some instances, it will be only after the collected information is
evaluated in light of other information that its relevance and
necessity for effective investigation and adjudication can be assessed.
Collection of such information permits more informed decision-making by
the Department when making required disciplinary and prosecutorial
determinations. Additionally, records within this system may be
properly classified pursuant to executive order. Further, it is not
always possible to determine relevancy or necessity of specific
information in the earlier stages of responding to a FOIA or Privacy
Act request or in litigation case development, including with respect
to records pertaining to suitability determinations or armed services
promotion evaluations that contain information about sources who were
granted an express promise of confidentiality, or pertaining to testing
or examination material used solely to determine individual
qualifications for appointment or promotion in the Federal service, the
disclosure of which would compromise the objectivity or fairness of the
testing or examination process. Such information may later be deemed
unnecessary upon further assessment. Accordingly, application of
exemptions (j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(3), (k)(5), (k)(6), or (k)(7)
may be necessary.
(D) Subsection (e)(2). To collect information from the subject
individual could serve notice that he or she is the subject of a
criminal investigation and thereby present a serious impediment to such
investigations. Collection of information only from the individual
accused of criminal activity or misconduct could also subvert discovery
of relevant evidence and subvert the course of justice. Accordingly,
application of exemption (j)(2) may be necessary.
(E) Subsection (e)(3). To inform individuals as required by this
subsection could reveal the existence of a criminal investigation and
compromise investigative efforts.
[[Page 51614]]
Accordingly, application of exemption (j)(2) may be necessary.
(F) Subsections (e)(4)(G) and (H). These subsections are
inapplicable to the extent an exemption is claimed from subsections
(d)(1) and (2).
(G) Subsection (e)(4)(I). To the extent that this provision is
construed to require more detailed disclosure than the broad
information currently published in the system notice concerning
categories of sources of records in the system, an exemption from this
provision is necessary to protect the confidentiality of sources of
information, the privacy and physical safety of witnesses and
informants, and testing or examination material used solely to
determine individual qualifications for appointment of promotion in the
Federal service. Accordingly, application of exemptions (j)(2), (k)(1),
(k)(2), (k)(5), (k)(6), and (k)(7) may be necessary.
(H) Subsection (e)(5). It is often impossible to determine in
advance if investigatory records contained in this system are accurate,
relevant, timely and complete, but, in the interests of effective law
enforcement, it is necessary to retain this information to maintain an
accurate record of the investigatory activity to preserve the integrity
of the investigation and satisfy various Constitutional and evidentiary
requirements, such as mandatory disclosure of potentially exculpatory
information in the investigative file to a defendant. It is also
necessary to retain this information to aid in establishing patterns of
activity and provide investigative leads. With the passage of time,
seemingly irrelevant or untimely information may acquire new
significance as further investigation brings new details to light and
the accuracy of such information can only be determined through
judicial processes. Accordingly, application of exemption (j)(2) may be
necessary.
(I) Subsection (e)(8). To serve notice could give persons
sufficient warning to evade investigative efforts. Accordingly,
application of exemption (j)(2) may be necessary.
(J) Subsection (f). To the extent that portions of the system are
exempt from the provisions of the Privacy Act concerning individual
access and amendment of records, DoD is not required to establish rules
concerning procedures and requirements relating to such provisions.
Accordingly, application of exemptions (j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(5),
(k)(6), and (k)(7) may be necessary.
(K) Subsection (g). This subsection is inapplicable to the extent
that the system is exempt from other specific subsections of the
Privacy Act to which the civil remedies provisions pertain.
(iv) Exempt records from other systems. In the course of carrying
out the overall purpose for this system, exempt records from other
systems of records may in turn become part of the records maintained in
this system. To the extent that copies of exempt records from those
other systems of records are maintained in this system, the DoD claims
the same exemptions for the records from those other systems that are
entered into this system, as claimed for the prior system(s) of which
they are a part, provided the reason for the exemption remains valid
and necessary.
* * * * *
Dated: August 16, 2022.
Aaron T. Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2022-17977 Filed 8-22-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P