Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation, 73301-73303 [2023-23299]
Download as PDF
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules
proposed rulemaking (REG–122793–19)
that was published in the Federal
Register on Tuesday, August 29, 2023.
The proposed regulations relate to
information reporting, the
determination of amount realized and
basis, and backup withholding, for
certain digital asset sales and exchanges.
DATES: The comment period for written
or electronic comments for the notice of
proposed rulemaking published on
August 29, 2023 (88 FR 59576) is
extended from October 30, 2023, to
November 13, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Commenters are strongly
encouraged to submit public comments
electronically. Submit electronic
submissions via the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov (indicate IRS and
REG–122793–19) by following the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted to the
Federal eRulemaking Portal, comments
cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
Department of the Treasury (Treasury
Department) and the IRS will publish
any comments submitted electronically
or on paper to the public docket. Send
paper submissions to: CC:PA:01:PR
(REG–122793–19), Room 5203, Internal
Revenue Service, P.O. Box 7604, Ben
Franklin Station, Washington, DC
20044. Submissions may be handdelivered Monday through Friday
between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.
to CC:PA:01:PR (REG–122793–19),
Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue
Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20224.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Concerning the proposed regulations
under sections 1001 and 1012, Kyle
Walker, (202) 317–4718, or Harith
Razaa, (202) 317–7006, of the Office of
the Associate Chief Counsel (Income
Tax and Accounting); concerning the
international sections of the proposed
regulations under sections 3406 and
6045, John Sweeney or Alan Williams of
the Office of the Associate Chief
Counsel (International) at (202) 317–
6933, and concerning the remainder of
the proposed regulations under sections
3406, 6045, 6045A, 6045B, 6050W,
6721, and 6722, Roseann Cutrone of the
Office of the Associate Chief Counsel
(Procedure and Administration) at (202)
317–5436 (not toll-free numbers).
Concerning submissions of comments
and requests to participate in the public
hearing, Vivian Hayes at
publichearings@irs.gov (preferred) or at
(202) 317–6901 (not a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice
of proposed rulemaking and request for
comments that appeared in the Federal
Register on Tuesday, August 29, 2023
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Oct 24, 2023
Jkt 262001
73301
(88 FR 59576) announced that written or
electronic comments must be received
by October 30, 2023. Due to strong
public interest, the due date to receive
comments has been extended to
Monday, November 13, 2023. The
public hearing has not been extended
and is still scheduled for November 7,
2023, at 10 a.m. ET. If the number of
requests to speak at the hearing exceeds
the number that can be accommodated
in one day, a second public hearing date
for this proposed regulation will be held
on November 8, 2023. Requests to speak
at the public hearing must be made by
email to publichearings@irs.gov and still
must be received by October 30, 2023.
Persons who wish to present oral
comments at the public hearing must
submit written or electronic comments
and an outline of the topics to be
discussed as well as the time to be
devoted to each topic, not to exceed ten
minutes in total, by October 30, 2023.
Identifier Number (RIN), and title, by
any of the following methods.
* Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
* Mail: Department of Defense, Office
of the Assistant to the Secretary of
Defense for Privacy, Civil Liberties, and
Transparency, Regulatory Directorate,
4800 Mark Center Drive, Attn: Mailbox
24, Suite 08D09, Alexandria, VA 22350–
1700.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or RIN for this Federal
Register document. The general policy
for comments and other submissions
from members of the public is to make
these submissions available for public
viewing on the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information.
Oluwafunmilayo A. Taylor,
Section Chief, Publications and Regulations,
Associate Chief Counsel, (Procedure &
Administration).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
[FR Doc. 2023–23624 Filed 10–24–23; 8:45 am]
I. Background
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 310
[Docket ID: DoD–2023–OS–0098]
RIN 0790–AL66
Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation
Office of the Assistant to the
Secretary of Defense for Privacy, Civil
Liberties, and Transparency
(OATSD(PCLT)), Department of
Defense.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The OATSD(PCLT) is giving
notice of a proposed rule making for a
new component system of records
pursuant to the Privacy Act of 1974 for
the Army Safety Management Program
Records (ASMPR), A0385–1 DAS. In
this proposed rulemaking, the
Department proposes to exempt
portions of this system of records from
certain provisions of the Privacy Act to
protect the identity of confidential
sources in reports prepared during
accidents, mishaps, safety inspections,
and workplace hazards investigations.
DATES: Send comments on or before
December 26, 2023.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number, Regulation
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Ms.
Rahwa Keleta, OSD.DPCLTD@mail.mil;
(703) 571–0070.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
In accordance with the Privacy Act of
1974, the Department of the Army is
establishing a new system of records
titled Army Safety Management
Program Records (ASMPR), A0385–1
DAS. This system of records supports
the prevention and management of
injuries and illnesses due to workrelated activities, and reduces its
adverse impact on operational
readiness. The system maintains records
about individuals who suffer workrelated injuries or illness caused by an
accident, mishap, or hazard during
work-related activities while on or off a
DoD worksite, where there is a nexus to
Army personnel, activities, or facilities/
equipment, and/or individuals found to
have contributed to the accident,
mishap, or hazard.
II. Privacy Act 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
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(1)–(3), (c),
and (e). This proposed rule explains
why an exemption is being claimed for
this system of records and invites public
comment, which DoD will consider
E:\FR\FM\25OCP1.SGM
25OCP1
73302
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules
before the issuance of a final rule
implementing the exemption.
The Department of the Army proposes
to modify 32 CFR 310.15 to add a new
Privacy Act exemption rule for A0385–
1 DAS, ‘‘Army Safety Management
Program Records (ASMPR),’’ and to
exempt portions of this system of
records from certain provisions of the
Privacy Act because some records may
contain investigatory material compiled
for law enforcement purposes within
the scope of 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), other
than material within the scope of
subsection (j)(2), which describes
certain material related to the
enforcement of criminal laws
maintained by principal-function
criminal law enforcement agencies. The
Department of the Army therefore is
proposing to claim an exemption from
several provisions of the Privacy Act,
including various access, amendment,
disclosure of accounting, and certain
record-keeping and notice requirements,
to prevent, among other harms, the
identification of actual or potential
subjects of investigation and/or sources
of investigative information and to
avoid frustrating the underlying law
enforcement purpose for which the
records were collected. Records in this
system of records are only exempt from
the Privacy Act to the extent the
purposes underlying the exemption
pertain to the record. A notice of a new
system of records for A0385–1 DAS,
Army Safety Management Program
Records (ASMPR), is also published in
this issue of the Federal Register.
Regulatory Analysis
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
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 rulemaking is not a significant
regulatory action under these Executive
orders.
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C.
804(2))
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Oct 24, 2023
Jkt 262001
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 rulemaking 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 rulemaking is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Section 202, Public Law 104–4,
‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’
Section 202(a) of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a)) 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 rulemaking will not mandate any
requirements for State, local, or tribal
governments, nor will it affect private
sector costs.
Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory
Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
The Assistant to the Secretary of
Defense for Privacy, Civil Liberties, and
Transparency has certified that this
rulemaking is not subject to the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.) because it would not, if
promulgated, have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This
rulemaking 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. 3501 et seq.)
The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) was enacted to
minimize the paperwork burden for
individuals; small businesses;
educational and nonprofit institutions;
Federal contractors; State, local and
tribal governments; and other persons
resulting from the collection of
information by or for the Federal
Government. The Act requires agencies
obtain approval from the Office of
Management and Budget before using
identical questions to collect
information from ten or more persons.
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
This rulemaking does not impose
reporting or recordkeeping requirements
on the public.
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’
Executive Order 13132 establishes
certain requirements that an agency
must meet when it promulgates a rule
that has federalism implications,
imposes substantial direct compliance
costs on State and local governments,
and is not required by statute, or has
federalism implications and preempts
State law. This rulemaking will not have
a substantial effect on State and local
governments.
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
proposed rule (and subsequent final
rule) that imposes substantial direct
compliance costs on one or more Indian
tribes, preempts tribal law, or affects the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes. This
rulemaking will not have a substantial
effect on Indian tribal governments.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 310
Privacy.
Accordingly, the Department of
Defense proposes to amend 32 CFR part
310 as follows:
PART 310—PROTECTION OF PRIVACY
AND ACCESS TO AND AMENDMENT
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.
2. Section 310.15 is amended by
adding paragraph (g)(36) to read as
follows:
■
§ 310.15 Department of the Army
exemptions.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(36) System identifier and name.
A0385–1 DAS, ‘‘Army Safety
Management Program Records
(ASMPR).’’
(i) Exemptions. This system of records
is exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a (c)(3);
(d)(1), (2), (3), and (4); (e)(1); (e)(4)(G),
(H), (I), and (f).
(ii) Authority. 5 U.S.C. 552a (k)(2).
(iii) Exemption from the particular
subsections. Exemption from the
particular subsections is justified for the
following reasons:
E:\FR\FM\25OCP1.SGM
25OCP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(A) Subsections (c)(3), (d)(1), and
(d)(2)—Exemption (k)(2). Records in this
system of records may contain
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 efforts by
permitting the record subject and other
persons to whom the subject might
disclose the records or 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; or
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.
(B) Subsection (d)(3), and (d)(4).
These subsections are inapplicable to
the extent that an exemption is being
claimed from subsections (d)(1) and (2).
Accordingly, exemptions from
subsections (d)(3), and (d)(4) areclaimed
pursuant to (k)(2).
(C) Subsection (e)(1). In the collection
of information for investigatory
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
determinations. Accordingly,
application of exemption (k)(2) may be
necessary.
(D) Subsection (e)(4)(G) and (H).
These subsections are inapplicable to
the extent exemption is claimed from
subsections (d)(1) and (2).
(E) Subsection (e)(4)(I). To the extent
that this provision is construed to
require more detailed disclosure than
the broad, generic information currently
published in the system notice, an
exemption from this provision is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Oct 24, 2023
Jkt 262001
necessary to protect the confidentiality
of sources of information and to protect
the privacy and physical safety of
witnesses and informants. Accordingly,
application of exemption (k)(2) may be
necessary.
(F) Subsection (f). The agency’s rules
are inapplicable to those portions of the
system that are exempt. Accordingly,
application of exemption (k)(2) may be
necessary.
(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.
*
*
*
*
*
73303
Dated: October 17, 2023.
Aaron T. Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Email: lscrulemaking@lsc.gov.
Include ‘‘Comments on Revisions to Part
1638’’ in the subject line of the message.
• Mail: Elijah Johnson, Assistant
General Counsel, Legal Services
Corporation, 3333 K Street NW,
Washington, DC 20007, ATTN: Part
1638 Rulemaking.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Elijah
Johnson, Assistant General Counsel,
Legal Services Corporation, 3333 K
Street NW, Washington, DC 20007,
ATTN: Part 1638 Rulemaking.
Instructions: Electronic submissions
are preferred via email with attachments
in Acrobat PDF format. LSC will not
consider written comments sent to any
other address or received after the end
of the comment period.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Elijah Johnson, Assistant General
Counsel, Legal Services Corporation,
3333 K Street NW, Washington, DC
20007; (202) 295–1638 (phone), or
johnsone@lsc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2023–23299 Filed 10–24–23; 8:45 am]
I. Background
BILLING CODE 6001–FR–P
On April 26, 1996, Congress passed
the appropriations act for Fiscal Year
1996. Public Law 104–134, 110 Stat.
1321. Through this statute, Congress
enacted a series of restrictions
applicable to LSC grant recipients’
activities. One of the restrictions was
section 504(a)(18), which states that
grant recipients
LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION
45 CFR Part 1638
Restriction on Solicitation
Legal Services Corporation.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This proposed rule revises the
Legal Services Corporation (LSC or
Corporation) regulation prohibiting
solicitation of clients. LSC proposes to
add definitions for ‘‘communicate’’ and
‘‘communication,’’ revise the existing
text to make language more active, and
clarify how recipients may interact with
client-eligible individuals. The main
goal of these revisions is to formalize
the interpretations that the Office of
Legal Affairs has issued over the past
several years, making clear that
recipients may inform client eligible
individuals about their rights and
responsibilities and provide them with
information about the recipient’s intake
process, as well as how recipients may
relay that information without violating
either LSC’s Fiscal Year 1996
appropriations statute or LSC’s
regulations.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be submitted by
December 26, 2023.
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ADDRESSES:
will not accept employment resulting from
in-person unsolicited advice to a nonattorney
that such nonattorney should obtain counsel
or take legal action, and will not refer such
nonattorney to another person or entity or an
employee of the person or entity, that is
receiving financial assistance provided by the
Corporation[.]
Public Law 104–134, 110 Stat. 1321,
1321–56.
On May 19, 1996, the Operations and
Regulations Committee of the LSC
Board requested LSC staff to prepare an
interim rule to implement section
504(a)(18), and in April 1997, LSC
promulgated part 1638. Consistent with
section 504(a)(18), LSC’s rule prohibited
a grant recipient from representing an
individual who had not sought legal
advice from the grant recipient but was
advised to seek legal representation or
take legal action by the grant recipient.
Part 1638 also prohibits grant recipients
who have given in-person unsolicited
advice to an individual from referring
the individual receiving the advice to
E:\FR\FM\25OCP1.SGM
25OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 25, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 73301-73303]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23299]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 310
[Docket ID: DoD-2023-OS-0098]
RIN 0790-AL66
Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for
Privacy, Civil Liberties, and Transparency (OATSD(PCLT)), Department of
Defense.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The OATSD(PCLT) is giving notice of a proposed rule making for
a new component system of records pursuant to the Privacy Act of 1974
for the Army Safety Management Program Records (ASMPR), A0385-1 DAS. In
this proposed rulemaking, the Department proposes to exempt portions of
this system of records from certain provisions of the Privacy Act to
protect the identity of confidential sources in reports prepared during
accidents, mishaps, safety inspections, and workplace hazards
investigations.
DATES: Send comments on or before December 26, 2023.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number,
Regulation Identifier Number (RIN), and title, by any of the following
methods.
* Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
* Mail: Department of Defense, Office of the Assistant to the
Secretary of Defense for Privacy, Civil Liberties, and Transparency,
Regulatory Directorate, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Attn: Mailbox 24, Suite
08D09, Alexandria, VA 22350-1700.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number or RIN for this Federal Register document. The
general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the
public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov as they are received without
change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Rahwa Keleta, [email protected];
(703) 571-0070.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, the Department of the
Army is establishing a new system of records titled Army Safety
Management Program Records (ASMPR), A0385-1 DAS. This system of records
supports the prevention and management of injuries and illnesses due to
work-related activities, and reduces its adverse impact on operational
readiness. The system maintains records about individuals who suffer
work-related injuries or illness caused by an accident, mishap, or
hazard during work-related activities while on or off a DoD worksite,
where there is a nexus to Army personnel, activities, or facilities/
equipment, and/or individuals found to have contributed to the
accident, mishap, or hazard.
II. Privacy Act 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 pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(1)-(3), (c), and (e). This proposed rule explains why an
exemption is being claimed for this system of records and invites
public comment, which DoD will consider
[[Page 73302]]
before the issuance of a final rule implementing the exemption.
The Department of the Army proposes to modify 32 CFR 310.15 to add
a new Privacy Act exemption rule for A0385-1 DAS, ``Army Safety
Management Program Records (ASMPR),'' and to exempt portions of this
system of records from certain provisions of the Privacy Act because
some records may contain investigatory material compiled for law
enforcement purposes within the scope of 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), other
than material within the scope of subsection (j)(2), which describes
certain material related to the enforcement of criminal laws maintained
by principal-function criminal law enforcement agencies. The Department
of the Army therefore is proposing to claim an exemption from several
provisions of the Privacy Act, including various access, amendment,
disclosure of accounting, and certain record-keeping and notice
requirements, to prevent, among other harms, the identification of
actual or potential subjects of investigation and/or sources of
investigative information and to avoid frustrating the underlying law
enforcement purpose for which the records were collected. Records in
this system of records are only exempt from the Privacy Act to the
extent the purposes underlying the exemption pertain to the record. A
notice of a new system of records for A0385-1 DAS, Army Safety
Management Program Records (ASMPR), is also published in this issue of
the Federal Register.
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 rulemaking is not a
significant regulatory action under these Executive orders.
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2))
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 rulemaking 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 rulemaking is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Section 202, Public Law 104-4, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act''
Section 202(a) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a)) 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 rulemaking will not mandate any
requirements for State, local, or tribal governments, nor will it
affect private sector costs.
Public Law 96-354, ``Regulatory Flexibility Act'' (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.)
The Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Privacy, Civil
Liberties, and Transparency has certified that this rulemaking is not
subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
because it would not, if promulgated, have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rulemaking 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. 3501 et seq.)
The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) was
enacted to minimize the paperwork burden for individuals; small
businesses; educational and nonprofit institutions; Federal
contractors; State, local and tribal governments; and other persons
resulting from the collection of information by or for the Federal
Government. The Act requires agencies obtain approval from the Office
of Management and Budget before using identical questions to collect
information from ten or more persons. This rulemaking does not impose
reporting or recordkeeping requirements on the public.
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism''
Executive Order 13132 establishes certain requirements that an
agency must meet when it promulgates a rule that has federalism
implications, imposes substantial direct compliance costs on State and
local governments, and is not required by statute, or has federalism
implications and preempts State law. This rulemaking will not have a
substantial effect on State and local governments.
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 proposed rule (and subsequent
final rule) that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on one or
more Indian tribes, preempts tribal law, or affects the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. This rulemaking will not have a substantial effect on Indian
tribal governments.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 310
Privacy.
Accordingly, the Department of Defense proposes to amend 32 CFR
part 310 as follows:
PART 310--PROTECTION OF PRIVACY AND ACCESS TO AND AMENDMENT 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 310.15 is amended by adding paragraph (g)(36) to read as
follows:
Sec. 310.15 Department of the Army exemptions.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(36) System identifier and name. A0385-1 DAS, ``Army Safety
Management Program Records (ASMPR).''
(i) Exemptions. This system of records is exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a
(c)(3); (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4); (e)(1); (e)(4)(G), (H), (I), and
(f).
(ii) Authority. 5 U.S.C. 552a (k)(2).
(iii) Exemption from the particular subsections. Exemption from the
particular subsections is justified for the following reasons:
[[Page 73303]]
(A) Subsections (c)(3), (d)(1), and (d)(2)--Exemption (k)(2).
Records in this system of records may contain 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 efforts by permitting the record
subject and other persons to whom the subject might disclose the
records or 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; or
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.
(B) Subsection (d)(3), and (d)(4). These subsections are
inapplicable to the extent that an exemption is being claimed from
subsections (d)(1) and (2). Accordingly, exemptions from subsections
(d)(3), and (d)(4) areclaimed pursuant to (k)(2).
(C) Subsection (e)(1). In the collection of information for
investigatory 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 determinations. Accordingly,
application of exemption (k)(2) may be necessary.
(D) Subsection (e)(4)(G) and (H). These subsections are
inapplicable to the extent exemption is claimed from subsections (d)(1)
and (2).
(E) Subsection (e)(4)(I). To the extent that this provision is
construed to require more detailed disclosure than the broad, generic
information currently published in the system notice, an exemption from
this provision is necessary to protect the confidentiality of sources
of information and to protect the privacy and physical safety of
witnesses and informants. Accordingly, application of exemption (k)(2)
may be necessary.
(F) Subsection (f). The agency's rules are inapplicable to those
portions of the system that are exempt. Accordingly, application of
exemption (k)(2) may be necessary.
(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: October 17, 2023.
Aaron T. Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2023-23299 Filed 10-24-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6001-FR-P