This PDF is the current document as it appeared on Public Inspection on 09/13/2012 at 08:45 am.
Direct final rule with request for comments.
Department of the Navy is updating the Navy Privacy Act Program by adding the (k)(2) exemption to accurately describe the basis for exempting the records in the system of records notice N05800-2, Professional Responsibility Files.
This direct final rule makes non-substantive changes to the Department of the Navy's Program rules. This will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of DoD's program by ensuring the integrity of the security and investigative material compiled for law enforcement purposes by the Department of the Navy and the Department of Defense. This rule is being published as a direct final rule as the Department of Defense does not expect to receive any adverse comments, and so a proposed rule is unnecessary.
The rule will be effective on November 23, 2012 unless comments are received that would result in a contrary determination. Comments will be accepted on or before November 13, 2012.
You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:
- Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
- Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive; East Tower, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number 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 http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms. Robin Patterson at 202-685-6546.
Direct Final Rule and Significant Adverse Comments
DoD has determined this rulemaking meets the criteria for a direct final rule because it involves nonsubstantive changes dealing with DoD's management of its Privacy Programs. DoD expects no opposition to the changes and no significant adverse comments. However, if DoD receives a significant adverse comment, the Department will withdraw this direct final rule by publishing a notice in the Federal Register. A significant adverse comment is one that explains: (1) Why the direct final rule is inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach; or (2) why the direct final rule will be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. In determining whether a comment necessitates withdrawal of this direct final rule, DoD will consider whether it warrants a substantive response in a notice and comment process.
Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review” and Executive Order 13563, “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review”
It has been determined that Privacy Act rules for the Department of Defense are not significant rules. The rules do not (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy; a sector of the economy; productivity; competition; jobs; the environment; public health or safety; or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another Agency; (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in these Executive orders.
Public Law 96-354, “Regulatory Flexibility Act” (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6)
It has been determined that Privacy Act rules for the Department of Defense do not have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they are concerned only with the administration of Privacy Act systems of records within the Department of Defense.
Public Law 96-511, “Paperwork Reduction Act” (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been determined that Privacy Act rules for the Department of Defense impose no additional information collection requirements on the public under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Section 202, Public Law 104-4, “Unfunded Mandates Reform Act”
It has been determined that Privacy Act rules for the Department of Defense do not involve a Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more and that such rulemaking will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
Executive Order 13132, “Federalism”
It has been determined that Privacy Act rules for the Department of Defense do not have federalism implications. The rules do 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.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 701
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 701 is amended as follows:
PART 701—AVAILABILITY OF DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY RECORDS AND PUBLICATION OF DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY DOCUMENTS AFFECTING THE PUBLIC
1. The authority citation for
Subpart G—Privacy Act Exemptions
2. In § 701.128, add paragraph (x) to read as follows:
(x) System identifier and name: N05800-2, Professional Responsibility Files.
(1) Exemptions: Investigatory material compiled for law enforcement purposes, may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(k)(2). However, if an individual is denied any right, privilege, or benefit for which he would otherwise be entitled by Federal law or which he would otherwise be eligible, as a result of maintenance of the information, the individual will be provided access to the information except to the extent that disclosure would reveal the identity of a confidential source. Any portion of this record system which falls within the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) may be exempt from the following subsections of 5 U.S.C. 552a: (c)(3), (d)(1) through (5), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I).
(2) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2).
(3) The reason for asserting this exemption (k)(2) is to ensure the integrity of the litigation process.
Dated: September 11, 2012.
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2012-22673 Filed 9-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P