[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 40 (Friday, February 28, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11829-11830]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-02943]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 85 , No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2020 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 11829]]
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
6 CFR Part 5
[Docket No. DHS-2020-0003]
Disclosure of Records and Information Regulations; Technical
Amendment
AGENCY: DHS, Privacy Office.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Security (``DHS'') is updating its
regulations related to the procedures for disclosure of records
information under the Privacy Act. Specifically, DHS is updating its
regulations to state that the DHS Office of the General Counsel or its
designee is the authorized appeals authority with respect to requests
made under the Privacy Act.
DATES: This final rule is effective on February 28, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this document
call Jonathan R. Cantor, Chief Privacy Officer (Acting), telephone 202-
343-1717.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Discussion of the Rule
The Department of Homeland Security (``DHS'') is updating its
regulations to state that the DHS Office of the General Counsel or its
designee is the authorized appeals authority with respect to requests
made under the Privacy Act.\1\ Pursuant to the Privacy Act, DHS
promulgated regulations implementing procedures for processing requests
made by an individual regarding records or information pertaining to
that individual. See 5 U.S.C. 552a(f); 6 CFR 5.20-5.36. The regulations
provide for appeals within the agency after initial adverse
determinations. See 5 U.S.C. 552a(f)(4); 33 CFR 5.24, 5.25, 5.26, 5.27.
In all instances where these regulations designate the appellate
authority as the Associate General Counsel (General Law), this
technical amendment updates the regulations to reflect that the
appellate authority is the Office of General Counsel or its designee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 5 U.S.C. 552a; 6 CFR 5.20-5.36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Regulatory History
DHS did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking for this rule.
Under Title 5 of the United States Code (U.S.C.), Section 553(b)(A),
this final rule is exempt from notice and public comment rulemaking
requirements because the change involves rules of agency organization,
procedure, or practice. In addition, under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), an
agency may waive the notice and comment requirements if it finds, for
good cause, that notice and comment is impracticable, unnecessary, or
contrary to the public interest. DHS finds that notice and comment is
unnecessary under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) because the change of the named
appellate authority is an agency procedural update that will have no
substantive effect on the public. For the same reasons, DHS finds that
good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making this final rule
effective immediately upon publication.
III. Regulatory Analyses
DHS considered numerous statutes and executive orders related to
rulemaking when developing this rule. Below are summarized analyses
based on these statutes or executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review) direct agencies to assess
the 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, distributive 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. Executive Order 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs) directs agencies to reduce regulation and control
regulatory costs and provides that ``for every one new regulation
issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination,
and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and
controlled through a budgeting process.''
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this
rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it. Because this rule is
not a significant regulatory action, this rule is exempt from the
requirements of Executive Order 13771. See the OMB Memorandum titled
``Guidance Implementing Executive Order 13771, titled `Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' '' (April 5, 2017). This
rule involves non-substantive changes and internal agency practices and
procedures; it will not impose any additional costs on the public. The
benefit of the non-substantive change that updates internal agency
procedures is increased clarity and accuracy of regulations for the
public.
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, DHS has
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
This rule is not preceded by a notice of proposed rulemaking.
Therefore, it is exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612). The Regulatory Flexibility Act does
not apply when notice and comment rulemaking is not required. This rule
consists of a technical amendment to internal agency procedures and
does not have any substantive effect on the regulated industry or small
businesses.
C. Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.
D. Environment
DHS reviews proposed actions to determine whether the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
[[Page 11830]]
applies to them and if so what degree of analysis is required. DHS
Directive 023-01 Rev. 01 (Directive) and Instruction Manual 023-01-001-
01 Rev. 01 (Instruction Manual) establish the procedures that DHS and
its components use to comply with NEPA and the Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementing NEPA, 40 CFR parts 1500
through 1508.
The CEQ regulations allow federal agencies to establish, with CEQ
review and concurrence, categories of actions (``categorical
exclusions'') which experience has shown do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and,
therefore, do not require an Environmental Assessment (EA) or
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). 40 CFR 1507.3(b)(2)(ii), 1508.4.
For an action to be categorically excluded, it must satisfy each of the
following three conditions: (1) The entire action clearly fits within
one or more of the categorical exclusions; (2) the action is not a
piece of a larger action; and (3) no extraordinary circumstances exist
that create the potential for a significant environmental effect.
Instruction Manual section V.B(2)(a)-(c).
This rule is a technical amendment that updates internal agency
procedures. Specifically, the amendment updates the designated appeals
authority for requests made under the Privacy Act. Therefore, it
clearly fits within categorical exclusion A3(a) ``Promulgation of rules
. . . of a strictly administrative or procedural nature.'' Instruction
Manual, Appendix A, Table 1. Furthermore, the rule is not part of a
larger action and presents no extraordinary circumstances creating the
potential for significant environmental impacts. Therefore, the
amendment is categorically excluded from further NEPA review.
List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5
Classified information, Courts, Freedom of information, Government
employees, Privacy.
For the reason stated in the preamble, DHS amends 6 CFR part 5 as
follows:
PART 5--DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS AND INFORMATION
0
1. The authority citation for part 5 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; Pub. L. 107-296, 116 Stat.
2135; 5 U.S.C. 301.
Subpart A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552
Subpart B also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Sec. 5.24 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 5.24, remove, ``Associate General Counsel (General Law)''
and add, in its place, ``DHS Office of the General Counsel or its
designee''.
Sec. 5.25 [Amended]
0
3. In Sec. 5.25, amend paragraphs (a) and (b) by removing, ``Associate
General Counsel (General Law)'' and adding in its place, ``DHS Office
of the General Counsel or its designee''.
Sec. 5.26 [Amended]
0
4. In Sec. 5.26(c), remove ``Associate General Counsel (General Law)''
and add in its place, ``DHS Office of the General Counsel or its
designee''.
Sec. 5.27 [Amended]
0
5. In Sec. 5.27(c), remove ``Associate General Counsel (General Law)''
and addin its place ``DHS Office of the General Counsel or its
designee''.
Jonathan R. Cantor,
Chief Privacy Officer (Acting), Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2020-02943 Filed 2-27-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P