29072 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

PART 179—CLAIMS COLLECTIONS 

STANDARDS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 179 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1103; Reorganization 

Plan No. 2 of 1978; 5 U.S.C. 5514; 5 CFR part 

550 subpart K; 31 U.S.C. 3701, 31 U.S.C. 

3711; 31 U.S.C. 3716; 31 U.S.C. 3720A; 31 

U.S.C. 3720B; 31 U.S.C. 3720C; 31 U.S.C. 

3720D. 

■ 2. Add subpart D to read as follows: 

Subpart D—Administrative Wage 

Garnishment 

Sec. 

179.401 Administrative wage garnishment. 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 46; 31 U.S.C. 3720D; 

31 CFR 285.11(f). 

§ 179.401 Administrative wage 

garnishment. 

General. OPM may use administrative 

wage garnishment to collect debts in 

accordance with the requirements of 31 

U.S.C. 3720D and 31 CFR 285.11, 

including debts it refers to the Bureau 

of the Fiscal Service, Department of the 

Treasury, for cross-servicing pursuant to 

31 U.S.C. 3711. This part adopts and 

incorporates all of the provisions of 31 

CFR 285.11 concerning administrative 

wage garnishment, including the 

hearing procedures described in 31 CFR 

285.11(f). This section does not apply to 

collection of debt by Federal salary 

offset, under 5 U.S.C. 5514, the process 

by which OPM collects debts from the 

salaries of Federal employees. 

[FR Doc. 2014–11624 Filed 5–20–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6325–23–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Office of the Secretary 

6 CFR Part 5 

[Docket No. DHS–2011–0033] 

Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of 

Exemptions; Department of Homeland 

Security/National Protection and 

Programs Directorate—002 Chemical 

Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards 

Personnel Surety Program System of 

Records 

AGENCY: Privacy Office, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland 

Security is issuing a final rule to amend 

its regulations to exempt portions of a 

newly established system of records 

titled, ‘‘Department of Homeland 

Security/National Protection and 

Programs Directorate—002 Chemical 

Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards 

Personnel Surety Program System of 

Records’’ from certain provisions of the 

Privacy Act. Specifically, the 

Department exempts portions of the 

‘‘Department of Homeland Security/

National Protection and Programs 

Directorate—002 Chemical Facility 

Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel 

Surety Program System of Records’’ 

from one or more provisions of the 

Privacy Act because of criminal, civil, 

and administrative enforcement 

requirements. 

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is 

effective May 21, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

general questions please contact: Emily 

Andrew (703) 235–2182, Senior Privacy 

Officer, National Protection and 

Programs Directorate, Department of 

Homeland Security, Washington, DC 

20528. For privacy issues please 

contact: Karen L. Neuman (202) 343– 

1717, Chief Privacy Officer, Privacy 

Office, Department of Homeland 

Security, Washington, DC 20528. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Department of Homeland 

Security (DHS) National Protection and 

Programs Directorate (NPPD) published 

a notice of proposed rulemaking in the 

Federal Register, 76 FR 34616, on June 

14, 2011, proposing to exempt portions 

of the system of records from one or 

more provisions of the Privacy Act 

because of criminal, civil, and 

administrative enforcement 

requirements. The system of records is 

the DHS/NPPD—002 Chemical Facility 

Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel 

Surety Program System of Records. The 

DHS/NPPD—002 Chemical Facility 

Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel 

Surety Program system of records notice 

(SORN) was published concurrently in 

the Federal Register, 76 FR 34732, June 

14, 2011, and comments were invited on 

both the notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM) and SORN. 

Public Comments 

DHS received three comments on the 

NPRM and one comment on the SORN. 

Comments on the NPRM and the SORN 

are outlined below, followed by the 

Department’s responses. 

DHS also received a comment in the 

public docket for the SORN (Document 

DHS–2011–0032–0003), which 

addressed the Chemical Facility AntiTerrorism Standards (CFATS) Personnel 

Surety Program Information Collection 

Request (Docket DHS–2009–0026) and 

other aspects of the Personnel Surety 

Program, but did not address the SORN, 

the NPRM, or privacy issues. DHS 

reviewed that comment, and responded 

to it in a Federal Register notice, 78 FR 

17680, March 22, 2013. 

NPRM 

Comment: One commenter suggested 

that the Department did not make ‘‘a 

good faith effort to provide the public 

with specific reasons or requirements’’ 

to justify Privacy Act exemptions. For 

this reason the commenter opposed 

DHS’s proposed exemptions. 

Response: The Department believes 

that it provided adequate justification to 

support the Privacy Act exemptions 

described in the NPRM. These 

exemptions are needed to protect the 

information (i.e., categories of records) 

listed in the SORN from disclosure to 

subjects or others related to the vetting 

activities described in the SORN. 

Specifically, the exemptions are 

required to preclude subjects of the 

CFATS Personnel Surety Program’s 

vetting activities from frustrating these 

vetting activities; to avoid disclosure of 

vetting activity techniques; to protect 

the identities and physical safety of 

confidential informants and law 

enforcement personnel; to ensure the 

Department’s ability to obtain 

information from third parties and other 

sources; to protect the privacy of third 

parties; to safeguard classified 

information; to safeguard records; and 

for other reasons discussed in the 

NPRM. Disclosure of information about 

persons vetted under the CFATS 

Personnel Surety Program to those 

persons could also permit them to avoid 

detection or apprehension. The 

exemptions proposed here are standard 

law enforcement and national security 

exemptions exercised by a large number 

of Federal law enforcement and 

intelligence agencies. 

Comment: A commenter is pleased 

that third-party individuals may be 

designated to act on behalf of facilities 

as ‘‘Submitters’’ under the CFATS 

Personnel Surety Program, and seeks 

clarification on how this will be 

accomplished. Specifically, the 

commenter sought clarification from 

DHS on two points: (a) ‘‘any security or 

information protection requirements 

that may be required to serve as a 

‘Submitter’ in light of the potential 

Privacy Act exemption DHS currently 

seeks and may receive’’; and (b) the 

mechanics of ‘‘[h]ow, specifically, 

authorized third parties will serve as a 

facility’s agent for elements of TSDB 

compliance[.]’’ 

Response: The Department does not 

currently envision any additional or 

new security or information protection 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 29073 

requirements that will apply to 

Submitters in light of the Privacy Act 

exemptions that are the subject of this 

rulemaking. The Department will 

publish a user manual when the CFATS 

Personnel Surety Program is 

implemented, discussing how different 

users can access and use the Web portal 

that the Department intends to establish 

for the CFATS Personnel Surety 

Program. 

Comment: A commenter stated that 

the Department’s proposal does 

‘‘comply with the Privacy Act or follow 

the corresponding lawful and 

reasonable exemptions provided in this 

case by the corresponding Department 

of Homeland Security Appropriations 

Act of 2007.’’ The commenter also 

expressed concerns relating to: (a) The 

length of time it will take the 

government to conduct screening, and 

the number of government entities 

involved in screening; (b) the scope of 

information being requested and the 

resulting burden on high-risk chemical 

facilities; and (c) the duplication 

involved for those individuals who have 

already been vetted against the Terrorist 

Screening Database (TSDB) as part of 

other government screening programs. 

The commenter was in favor of the 

proposed exemptions from portions of 

the Privacy Act. 

Response: The commenter’s concerns 

about the screening procedure, the 

scope of information requested, and 

duplicative screening efforts and 

recommendations are outside the scope 

of the SORN and this Privacy Act 

exemptions rulemaking. Nevertheless, 

the Department addressed the 

commenter’s other concerns in a 

Federal Register notice that solicited 

comments about the CFATS Personnel 

Surety Program Information Collection 

Request, 78 FR 17680, March 22, 2013. 

SORN 

Comment: One commenter asked 

whether or not individuals with 

national security clearances, individuals 

with access to restricted areas under the 

U.S. Army’s Chemical Personnel 

Reliability Program (CPRP), or 

individuals processed by ‘‘the DHS 

suitability program’’ could be exempted 

from the TSDB vetting requirements of 

the Personnel Surety Program. 

Response: Whether an individual (or 

category of individuals) could be 

exempted from the CFATS Personnel 

Surety Program is not within the scope 

of the SORN or this Privacy Act 

exemptions rulemaking. DHS’s 

responses to comments in this 

document are limited to addressing the 

SORN for the Personnel Surety Program, 

and to Privacy Act exemptions related 

to the collection and disclosure of 

information under the Personnel Surety 

Program Systems of Records. 

After considering public comments, 

the Department will implement the 

rulemaking as proposed. 

List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5 

Freedom of information; Privacy. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, Chapter I of Title 6, Code of 

Federal Regulations, is amended as 

follows: 

PART 5—DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS 

AND INFORMATION 

■ 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. 

■ 2. Add at the end of Appendix C to 

part 5, the following new paragraph 

‘‘73’’: 

Appendix C to Part 5—DHS Systems of 

Records Exempt From the Privacy Act 

* * * * * 

73. The DHS/NPPD—002 Chemical Facility 

Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel Surety 

Program System of Records consists of 

electronic and paper records and will be used 

by DHS and its components. The DHS/

NPPD—002 Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism 

Standards Personnel Surety Program System 

of Records is a repository of information held 

by DHS in connection with its several and 

varied missions and functions, including, but 

not limited to the enforcement of civil and 

criminal laws; investigations, inquiries, and 

proceedings thereunder; and national 

security and intelligence activities. The DHS/ 

NPPD—002 Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism 

Standards Personnel Surety Program System 

of Records contains information that is 

collected by, on behalf of, in support of, or 

in cooperation with DHS and its components 

and may contain personally identifiable 

information collected by other federal, state, 

local, tribal, foreign, or international 

government agencies. The Secretary of 

Homeland Security has exempted this system 

from the following provisions of the Privacy 

Act, subject to limitations set forth therein: 

5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), 

(e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I); and (f). These exemptions 

are made pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1) and 

(k)(2). 

In addition to records under the control of 

DHS, the DHS/NPPD—002 Chemical Facility 

Anti-Terrorism Standards Personnel Surety 

Program System of Records may include 

records originating from systems of records of 

other law enforcement and intelligence 

agencies, which may be exempt from certain 

provisions of the Privacy Act. DHS does not, 

however, assert exemption from any 

provisions of the Privacy Act with respect to 

information submitted by high-risk chemical 

facilities. 

To the extent the DHS/NPPD—002 

Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards 

Personnel Surety Program System of Records 

contains records originating from other 

systems of records, DHS will rely on the 

exemptions claimed for those records in the 

originating systems of records. Exemptions 

from these particular subsections are 

justified, on a case-by-case basis to be 

determined at the time a request is made, for 

the following reasons: 

(a) From subsection (c)(3) (Accounting for 

Disclosures) because release of the 

accounting of disclosures could alert the 

subject of an investigation of an actual or 

potential criminal, civil, or regulatory 

violation to the existence of that investigation 

and reveal investigative interest, on the part 

of DHS as well as the recipient agency. 

Disclosure of the accounting would therefore 

present a serious impediment to law 

enforcement efforts and/or efforts to preserve 

national security. Disclosure of the 

accounting would also permit the individual 

who is the subject of a record to impede the 

investigation, to tamper with witnesses or 

evidence, and to avoid detection or 

apprehension, which would undermine the 

entire investigative process. 

(b) From subsection (d) (Access to Records) 

because access to the records contained in 

this system of records could inform the 

subject of an investigation of an actual or 

potential criminal, civil, or regulatory 

violation to the existence of that investigation 

and reveal investigative interest on the part 

of DHS or another agency. Access to the 

records could permit the individual who is 

the subject of a record to impede the 

investigation, to tamper with witnesses or 

evidence, and to avoid detection or 

apprehension. Amendment of the records 

could interfere with ongoing investigations 

and law enforcement activities and would 

impose an unreasonable administrative 

burden by requiring investigations to be 

continually reinvestigated. In addition, 

permitting access and amendment to such 

information could disclose security-sensitive 

information that could be detrimental to 

homeland security. 

(c) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and 

Necessity of Information) because in the 

course of investigations into potential 

violations of federal law, the accuracy of 

information obtained or introduced 

occasionally may be unclear, or the 

information may not be strictly relevant or 

necessary to a specific investigation. In the 

interests of effective law enforcement, it is 

appropriate to retain all information that may 

aid in establishing patterns of unlawful 

activity. 

(d) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), 

and (e)(4)(I) (Agency Requirements) and (f) 

(Agency Rules), because portions of this 

system are exempt from the individual access 

provisions of subsection (d) for the reasons 

noted above, and therefore DHS is not 

required to establish requirements, rules, or 

procedures with respect to such access. 

Providing notice to individuals with respect 

to existence of records pertaining to them in 

the system of records or otherwise setting up 

procedures pursuant to which individuals 

may access and view records pertaining to 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
29074 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

themselves in the system would undermine 

investigative efforts and reveal the identities 

of witnesses, potential witnesses, and 

confidential informants. 

Dated: May 1, 2014. 

Karen L. Neuman, 

Chief Privacy Officer, Department of 

Homeland Security. 

[FR Doc. 2014–11433 Filed 5–20–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–10–P 

FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION 

12 CFR Part 652 

RIN 3052–AC83 

Federal Agricultural Mortgage 

Corporation Funding and Fiscal 

Affairs; Farmer Mac Liquidity 

Management 

AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration. 

ACTION: Notice of effective date. 

SUMMARY: The Farm Credit 

Administration (FCA, we or us) adopted 

a final rule that amends its liquidity 

management regulations for the Federal 

Agricultural Mortgage Corporation 

(Farmer Mac). The purpose of the final 

rule is to strengthen liquidity risk 

management at Farmer Mac, improve 

the quality of assets in its liquidity 

reserves, and bolster its ability to fund 

its obligations and continue operations 

during times of economic, financial, or 

market adversity. In accordance with 

the law, the effective date of the final 

rule is 180 days after the date of 

publication in the Federal Register, 

provided either or both Houses of 

Congress are in session for at least 30 

calendar days after publication of this 

regulation in the Federal Register. 

DATES: Effective Date: Under the 

authority of 12 U.S.C. 2252, the 

regulation amending 12 CFR part 652 

published on November 1, 2013 (78 FR 

65541) is effective April 30, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joseph T. Connor, Associate Director for 

Policy and Analysis, Office of 

Secondary Market Oversight, Farm 

Credit Administration, McLean, VA 

22102–5090, (703) 883–4280, TTY 

(703) 883–4056; or 

Richard A. Katz, Senior Counsel, Office 

of General Counsel, Farm Credit 

Administration, McLean, Virginia 

22102–5090, (703) 883–4020, TTY 

(703) 883–4056. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Farm 

Credit Administration (FCA, we or us) 

adopted a final rule that amends its 

liquidity management regulations for 

the Federal Agricultural Mortgage 

Corporation (Farmer Mac). The purpose 

of the final rule is to strengthen 

liquidity risk management at Farmer 

Mac, improve the quality of assets in its 

liquidity reserves, and bolster its ability 

to fund its obligations and continue 

operations during times of economic, 

financial, or market adversity. In 

accordance with 12 U.S.C. 2252, the 

effective date of the final rule is 180 

days after the date of publication in the 

Federal Register, provided either or 

both Houses of Congress are in session 

for at least 30 calendar days after 

publication of this regulation in the 

Federal Register. Based on the records 

of the sessions of Congress, the effective 

date of the regulations is April 30, 2014. 

(12 U.S.C. 2252(a)(9) and (10)) 

Dated: May 15, 2014. 

Dale L. Aultman, 

Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board. 

[FR Doc. 2014–11663 Filed 5–20–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6705–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 73 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0272; Airspace 

Docket No. 14–ASO–5] 

RIN 2120–AA66 

Amendment of Restricted Area R– 

5304C; Camp Lejeune, NC 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; technical 

amendment. 

SUMMARY: This action changes the name 

of the using agency for Restricted Area 

R–5304C, Camp Lejeune, NC. This is an 

administrative change to reflect 

organizational restructuring within the 

United States Marine Corps. It does not 

affect the boundaries, designated 

altitudes, time of designation or 

activities conducted within the 

restricted area. 

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, July 

24, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Gallant, Airspace Policy and 

Regulations Group, Office of Airspace 

Services, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 267–8783. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Rule 

This action amends Title 14 Code of 

Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 73 by 

updating the using agency name for 

Restricted Area R–5304C, Camp 

Lejeune, NC. The name change is due to 

organizational restructuring within the 

U.S. Marine Corps. This is an 

administrative change that does not 

affect the boundaries, designated 

altitudes, or activities conducted within 

the restricted area; therefore, notice and 

public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) 

are unnecessary. 

The FAA has determined that this 

action only involves an established 

body of technical regulations for which 

frequent and routine amendments are 

necessary to keep them operationally 

current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not 

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 

FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) 

does not warrant preparation of a 

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated 

impact is so minimal. Since this is a 

routine matter that only affects air traffic 

procedures and air navigation, it is 

certified that this rule, when 

promulgated, does not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator. 

Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 

describes in more detail the scope of the 

agency’s authority. 

This rulemaking is promulgated 

under the authority described in 

Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 

40103. Under that section, the FAA is 

charged with prescribing regulations to 

assign the use of the airspace necessary 

to ensure the safety of aircraft and the 

efficient use of airspace. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority as 

it makes an administrative change to the 

descriptions of Restricted Area R– 

5303C, Camp Lejeune, NC to reflect 

organizational realignments within the 

U.S. Marine Corps. 

Environmental Review 

The FAA has determined that this 

action qualifies for categorical exclusion 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act in accordance with FAA 

Order 1050.1E, Environmental Impacts: 

Policies and Procedures, paragraph 

311d. This airspace action is an 

administrative change to the 

descriptions of the affected restricted 

area to update the using agency name. 

It does not alter the dimensions, 

altitudes, or times of designation of the 

airspace; therefore, it is not expected to 

cause any potentially significant 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES