Federal Register: February 25, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 37)
DOCID: FR Doc 05-3663
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Army Department
CFR Citation: 32 CFR Part 505
DOCUMENT ID: [Army Regulation 195-2]
NOTICE: PROPOSED RULES
DOCUMENT ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUBJECT CATEGORY:
Privacy Act; Implementation
DATES: This proposed action will be effective without further notice on April 26, 2005, unless comments are received which result in a contrary determination.
DOCUMENT SUMMARY:
The Department of the Army is proposing to add an exemption rule for the system of records A01952c USACIDC, entitled `DoD Criminal Investigation Task Force Files'. The exemption ((j)(2)) will increase the value of the system of records for criminal law enforcement purposes.
SUMMARY:
Privacy Act; implementation,
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and 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 this Executive order.
Public Law 96354, ``Regulatory Flexibility Act'' (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6)
It has been certified 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 96511, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)
It has been certified that Privacy Act rules for the Department of
Defense impose no information requirements beyond the Department of
Defense and that the information collected within the Department of
Defense is necessary and consistent with 5 U.S.C. 552a, known as the Privacy Act of 1974.
[[Page 9262]]
Section 202, Public Law 1044, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act''
It has been certified that the Privacy Act rulemaking for the Department of Defense does 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 certified that the 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 505
Privacy.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 505 is proposed to be amended to read as follows:
PART 505ARMY PRIVACY ACT PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 505 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Pub. L. 93579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a).
2. Paragraph (e)(20) of Sec. 505.5 is amended by adding the following text to read as follows:
Sec. 505.5 Exemptions.
* * * * *
(e) Exempt Army records. * * *
(20) System identifier and name: A01952c USACIDC, DoD Criminal Investigation Task Force Files.
(i) Exemption: Parts of this system may be exempt pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 552a(j)(2) if the information is compiled and maintained by a
component of the agency, which performs as its principle function any
activity pertaining to the enforcement of criminal laws. Any portion of
this system of records which falls within the provisions of 5 U.S.C.
552a(j)(2) may be exempt from the following subsections of 5 U.S.C.
552a(c)(3), (c)(4), (d), (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).
(iii) Reasons: (A) From subsection (c)(3) because the release of
accounting of disclosure would inform a subject that he or she is under
investigation. This information would provide considerable advantage to
the subject in providing him or her with knowledge concerning the
nature of the investigation and the coordinated investigative efforts
and techniques employed by the cooperating agencies. This would greatly impede criminal law enforcement.
(B) From subsection (c)(4) and (d), because notification would
alert a subject to the fact that an open investigation on that individual is taking place, and might weaken the ongoing
investigation, reveal investigative techniques, and place confidential informants in jeopardy.
(C) From subsection (e)(1) because the nature of the criminal and/
or civil investigative function creates unique problems in prescribing
a specific parameter in a particular case with respect to what
information is relevant or necessary. Also, information may be received
which may relate to a case under the investigative jurisdiction of
another agency. The maintenance of this information may be necessary to
provide leads for appropriate law enforcement purposes and to establish
patterns of activity that may relate to the jurisdiction of other cooperating agencies.
(D) From subsection (e)(2) because collecting information to the
fullest extent possible directly from the subject individual may or may not be practical in a criminal and/or civil investigation.
(E) From subsection (e)(3) because supplying an individual with a
form containing a Privacy Act Statement would tend to inhibit
cooperation by many individuals involved in a criminal and/or civil
investigation. The effect would be somewhat adverse to established investigative methods and techniques.
(F) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I) because this system of
records is exempt from the access provisions of subsection (d).
(G) From subsection (e)(5) because the requirement that records be
maintained with attention to accuracy, relevance, timeliness, and
completeness would unfairly hamper the investigative process. It is the
nature of law enforcement for investigations to uncover the commission
of illegal acts at diverse stages. It is frequently impossible to
determine initially what information is accurate, relevant, timely, and
least of all complete. With the passage of time, seemingly irrelevant
or untimely information may acquire new significance as further investigation brings new details to light.
(H) From subsection (e)(8) because the notice requirements of this
provision could present a serious impediment to law enforcement by
revealing investigative techniques, procedures, and existence of confidential investigations.
(I) From subsection (f) because the agency's rules are inapplicable
to those portions of the system that are exempt and would place the
burden on the agency of either confirming or denying the existence of a
record pertaining to a requesting individual might in itself provide an
answer to that individual relating to an ongoing investigation. The
conduct of a successful investigation leading to the indictment of a
criminal offender precludes the applicability of established agency
rules relating to verification of record, disclosure of the record to
the individual and record amendment procedures for this record system.
(J) From subsection (g) because this system of records should be
exempt to the extent that the civil remedies relate to provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a from which this rule exempts the system.
* * * * *
Dated: February 18, 2005.
Jeannette OwingsBallard,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. 053663 Filed 22405; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 500106P
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Ms. Janice Thornton at (703) 428-6497.