498 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 6, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

(3) How would the removal of 

Division 1.1 explosives impact the 

security posture of chemical facilities? 

(4) Would the removal of Division 1.1 

explosives impact the regulatory burden 

of CFATS on chemical facilities? If so, 

in what ways and to what extent? 

V. Signature 

The Acting Secretary of Homeland 

Security, Chad F. Wolf, having reviewed 

and approved this document, has 

delegated the authority to electronically 

sign this document to Chad R. Mizelle, 

who is the Senior Official Performing 

the Duties of the General Counsel for 

DHS, for purposes of publication in the 

Federal Register. 

Chad R. Mizelle, 

Senior Official Performing the Duties of the 

General Counsel Department of Homeland 

Security. 

[FR Doc. 2020–27768 Filed 1–5–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–10–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

32 CFR Part 310 

[Docket ID DoD–2020–OS–0095] 

RIN 0790–AK96 

Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation 

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The DoD is giving concurrent 

notice of an updated system of records 

pursuant to the Privacy Act of 1974 for 

the DoD 0004 ‘‘Defense Repository for 

Common Enterprise Data (DRCED)’’ 

system of records and this proposed 

rulemaking. In this proposed 

rulemaking, the Department proposes to 

exempt portions of the DRCED system of 

records from certain provisions of the 

Privacy Act because of national security 

requirements. 

DATES: Send comments on or before 

March 8, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number and title, 

by any of the following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking Portal: https:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: The DoD cannot receive 

written comments at this time due to the 

COVID–19 pandemic. Comments should 

be sent electronically to the docket 

listed above. 

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 https:// 

www.regulations.gov as they are 

received without change, including any 

personal identifiers or contact 

information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Lyn Kirby, Chief, Defense Privacy, Civil 

Liberties, and Transparency Division, 

Directorate for Oversight and 

Compliance, Department of Defense, 

4800 Mark Center Drive, Mailbox #24, 

Suite 08D09, Alexandria, VA 22350– 

1700; OSD.DPCLTD@mail.mil; (703) 

571–0070. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The DoD 0004 DRCED system of 

records is a DoD-wide system of records 

that supports multiple information 

systems that provide DoD-wide and 

component-level enterprise solutions for 

integrating and analyzing targeted data 

from existing DoD systems to develop 

timely, actionable, and insightful 

conclusions in support of national 

strategies. These systems are used to 

automate financial and business 

transactions, perform cost-management 

analysis, produce oversight and audit 

reports, and provide critical data linking 

to improve performance of mission 

objectives. These systems are also 

capable of creating predictive analytic 

models based upon specific data 

streams to equip decision makers with 

critical data necessary for execution of 

fiscal and operational requirements. 

II. Privacy Act Exemption 

The Privacy Act allows 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. If an 

agency intends to exempt a particular 

system of records, it must typically first 

go through the rulemaking process to 

provide public notice and an 

opportunity to comment on the 

proposed exemption. This proposed 

rule explains why an exemption is being 

claimed for this system of records and 

invites public comment, which DoD 

will consider before the issuance of a 

final rule implementing the exemption. 

The DoD proposes to modify 32 CFR 

part 310 to add a new Privacy Act 

exemption rule for the DoD 0004 

DRCED system of records. The DoD 

proposes an exemption for DoD 0004 

DRCED because some of its records may 

contain classified national security 

information and disclosure of those 

records to an individual may cause 

damage to national security. The 

Privacy Act, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

552a(k)(1), authorizes agencies to claim 

an exemption for systems of records that 

contain information properly classified 

pursuant to executive order. DoD is 

proposing to claim an exemption from 

the access and amendment requirements 

of the Privacy Act, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

552a(k)(1), to prevent disclosure of any 

information properly classified pursuant 

to executive order, as implemented by 

DoD Instruction (DoDI) 5200.01 and 

DoD Manual (DoDM) 5200.01, Volumes 

1 and 3. 

If implemented, this proposed rule 

will deny an individual access under 

the Privacy Act to only those portions 

of records for which the claimed 

exemption applies. In addition, records 

in the DoD 0004 DRCED 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 modified system of 

records for DoD 0004 DRCED 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 proposed rule is not a significant 

regulatory action. 

Executive Order 13771, ‘‘Reducing 

Regulation and Controlling Regulatory 

Costs’’ 

This proposed rule has been deemed 

not significant under Executive Order 

(E.O.) 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and 

Review,’’ therefore, the requirements of 

E.O. 13771, ‘‘Reducing Regulation and 

Controlling Regulatory Costs’’ do not 

apply. 

Congressional Review Act 

This proposed rule is not a ‘‘major 

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 6, 2021 / Proposed Rules 499 

Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory 

Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C Chapter 6) 

It has been certified that this proposed 

rule does not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities because it is 

concerned only with the administration 

of Privacy Act Systems of Records 

within the DoD. A Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis is not required. 

Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork 

Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) 

It has been determined that this 

proposed rule does not impose 

additional information collection 

requirements on the public under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

Section 202, Public Law 104–4, 

‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’ 

It has been determined that this 

proposed rule 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 it will not significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’ 

It has been determined that this 

proposed rule does not have federalism 

implications. This rule does 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 310 

Privacy. 

Accordingly, 32 CFR part 310 is 

proposed to be amended 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 310.13 is amended by 

adding paragraph (e)(3) as follows: 

§ 310.13 Exemptions for DoD-wide 

systems. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(3) System identifier and name: DoD 

0004, ‘‘Defense Repository for Common 

Enterprise Data (DRCED).’’ 

(i) Exemptions: This system of records 

is exempt from subsections 5 U.S.C. 

552a(c)(3), (d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(3), and 

(d)(4) of the Privacy Act. 

(ii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1). 

(iii) Exemption from the particular 

subsections. Exemption from the 

particular subsections is justified for the 

following reasons: 

(A) Subsection (c)(3) (accounting of 

disclosures). Because common 

enterprise records may contain 

information properly classified pursuant 

to Executive Order, the disclosure 

accountings of such records may also 

contain information properly classified 

pursuant to executive order, the 

disclosure of which may cause damage 

to national security. 

(B) Subsections (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4) 

(record subject’s right to access and 

amend records). Access to and 

amendment of records by the record 

subject could disclose information 

properly classified pursuant to 

executive order. Disclosure of classified 

records to an individual may cause 

damage to national security. 

(iv) Exempt records from other 

systems. In addition, in the course of 

carrying out the overall purpose for this 

system, exempt records from other 

system 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: December 22, 2020. 

Aaron T. Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2020–28791 Filed 1–5–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS