[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 17, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7366-7367]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-3356]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

32 CFR Part 312


Office of the Inspector General: Privacy Act; Implementation

AGENCY: Office of the Inspector General, DoD.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Office of the Inspector General, DoD (OIG, DoD) is 
exempting the system of records CIG-21, entitled ``Congressional 
Correspondence Tracking System'' from 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), (k)(1) 
through (k)(7). The exemption is needed because during the course of a 
Congressional inquiry, exempt materials from other systems of records 
may in turn become part of the case records in the system. To the 
extent that copies of exempt records from those ``other'' systems of 
records are entered into the Privacy Act case records, the Inspector 
General, DoD, hereby claims the same exemptions for the records from 
those ``other'' systems that are entered into this system, as claimed 
for the original primary systems of records of which they are a part. 
In addition, two administrative changes are also being made.
    The proposed rule was published on December 9, 2003, at 68 FR 
68577. No comments were received; therefore, the rule is being adopted 
at published.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 10, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Darryl R. Aaron at (703) 604-9785.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed rule was published on December 
9, 2003, at 68 FR 68577. No comments were received; therefore, the rule 
is being adopted at published.

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 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 a 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 information requirements beyond the Office of the 
Inspector General and that the information collected within the Office 
of the Inspector General is necessary and consistent with 5 U.S.C. 
552a, known as the Privacy Act of 1974.

Section 202, Public Law 104-4, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act''

    It has been determined 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 determined that the Privacy Act rules for the 
Department of Defense does 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 312

    Privacy.

0
For reasons stated in the Preamble, 32 CFR part 312 is amended as 
follows:

PART 312--OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL (OIG) PRIVACY PROGRAM

0
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 312 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Pub. L. 93-579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a).


0
2. Section 312.8, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 312.8  OIG review of request for amendment.

    (a) A written acknowledgement of the receipt of a request for 
amendment of a record will be provided to the requester within 20 
working days, unless final action regarding approval or denial will 
constitute acknowledgement.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 312.12, paragraph (b) is revised and paragraph (i) is added 
to read as follows:


Sec. 312.12  Exemptions.

* * * * *
    (b) The Inspector General of the Department of Defense claims an 
exemption for the following record systems under the provisions of 5 
U.S.C. 552a(j) and (k)(1)-(k)(7) from certain indicated subsections of 
the Privacy Act of 1974. The exemptions may be invoked and exercised on 
a case-by-case basis by the Deputy Inspector General for Investigations 
or the Director,

[[Page 7367]]

Communications and Congressional Liaison Office, and the Chief, Freedom 
of Information/Privacy Act Office, which serve as the Systems Program 
Managers. Exemptions will be exercised only when necessary for a 
specific, significant and legitimate reason connected with the purpose 
of the records system.
* * * * *
    (i) System Identifier: CIG-21
    (1) System name: Congressional Correspondence Tracking System.
    (2) Exemption: During the processing of a Congressional inquiry, 
exempt materials from other systems of records may in turn become part 
of the case record in this system. To the extent that copies of exempt 
records from those ``other'' systems of records are entered into this 
system, the Inspector General, DoD, claims the same exemptions for the 
records from those ``other'' systems that are entered into this system, 
as claimed for the original primary system of which they are a part.
    (3) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(3), (k)(4), 
(k)(5), (k)(6), and (k)(7)
    (4) Reasons: Records are only exempt from pertinent provisions of 5 
U.S.C. 552a to the extent such provisions have been identified and an 
exemption claimed for the original record and the purposes underlying 
the exemption for the original record still pertain to the record which 
is now contained in this system of records. In general, the exemptions 
were claimed in order to protect properly classified information 
relating to national defense and foreign policy, to avoid interference 
during the conduct of criminal, civil, or administrative actions or 
investigations, to ensure protective services provided the President 
and others are not compromised, to protect the identity of confidential 
sources incident to Federal employment, military service, contract, and 
security clearance determinations, to preserve the confidentiality and 
integrity of Federal testing materials, and to safeguard evaluation 
materials used for military promotions when furnished by a confidential 
source. The exemption rule for the original records will identify the 
specific reasons why the records are exempt from specific provisions of 
5 U.S.C. 552a.

    Dated: February 11, 2004.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 04-3356 Filed 2-13-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M