Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 58 / Thursday, March 26, 2015 / Proposed Rules 15951 

attention of the person identified in 

paragraph (m)(1) of this AD. Information may 

be emailed to: 9-ANM-LAACO-AMOCRequests@faa.gov. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/

certificate holding district office. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD if it is approved by the 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) that has 

been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles 

ACO, to make those findings. For a repair 

method to be approved, the repair must meet 

the certification basis of the airplane, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(4) AMOCs approved for AD 2012–18–05, 

Amendment 39–17181 (77 FR 54793, 

September 6, 2012), are approved as AMOCs 

for the corresponding provisions of this AD. 

(m) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Se ́rj Harutunian, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140L, FAA, Los 

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 

3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 

90712–4137; phone: 562–627–5254; fax: 562– 

627–5210; email: serj.harutunian@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC 

D800–0019, Long Beach, CA 90846–0001; 

telephone 206–544–5000, extension 2; fax 

206–766–5683; Internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this 

referenced service information at the FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information 

on the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 

11, 2015. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06745 Filed 3–25–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

28 CFR Part 16 

[CPCLO Order No. 004–2014] 

Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation 

AGENCY: Department of Justice. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: As described in the notice 

section of this issue of the Federal 

Register, the Department of Justice 

(Department or DOJ) has published a 

notice of a new Department-wide 

Privacy Act system of records, 

‘‘Department of Justice, Giglio 

Information Files,’’ JUSTICE/DOJ–017. 

This system has been established to 

enable DOJ investigative agencies to 

collect and maintain records of potential 

impeachment information and to 

disclose such information to DOJ 

prosecuting offices in order to ensure 

that prosecutors receive sufficient 

information to meet their obligations 

under Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 

150 (1972), as well as to enable DOJ 

prosecuting offices to maintain records 

of potential impeachment information 

obtained from DOJ investigative 

agencies, other federal agencies, and 

state and local agencies and to disclose 

such information in accordance with the 

Giglio decision. For the reasons 

provided below, the Department 

proposes to amend its Privacy Act 

regulations by establishing an 

exemption for records in this system 

from certain provisions of the Privacy 

Act pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) and (k). 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

April 27, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Address all comments to 

the Privacy Analyst, Office of Privacy 

and Civil Liberties, National Place 

Building, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 

20530, or by facsimile to (202) 307– 

0693. To ensure proper handling, please 

reference the CPCLO Order Number on 

your correspondence. You may review 

an electronic version of the proposed 

rule at http://www.regulations.gov, and 

you may also comment by using that 

Web site’s comment form for this 

regulation. Please include the CPCLO 

Order Number in the subject box. 

Please note that the Department is 

requesting that electronic comments be 

submitted before midnight Eastern Time 

on the day the comment period closes 

because this is when http://

www.regulations.gov terminates the 

public’s ability to submit comments. 

Commenters in time zones other than 

Eastern Time may want to consider this 

so that their electronic comments are 

received. All comments sent via regular 

or express mail will be considered 

timely if postmarked on or before the 

day the comment period closes. 

Posting of Public Comments: Please 

note that all comments received are 

considered part of the public record and 

made available for public inspection 

online at http://www.regulations.gov 

and in the Department’s public docket. 

Such information includes personally 

identifying information (such as your 

name, address, etc.) voluntarily 

submitted by the commenter. 

If you want to submit personally 

identifying information (such as your 

name, address, etc.) as part of your 

comment, but do not want it to be 

posted online or made available in the 

public docket, you must include the 

phrase ‘‘PERSONALLY IDENTIFYING 

INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph 

of your comment. You must also place 

all the personally identifying 

information you do not want posted 

online or made available in the public 

docket in the first paragraph of your 

comment and identify what information 

you want redacted. 

If you want to submit confidential 

business information as part of your 

comment, but do not want it to be 

posted online or made available in the 

public docket, you must include the 

phrase ‘‘CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS 

INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph 

of your comment. You must also 

prominently identify confidential 

business information to be redacted 

within the comment. If a comment has 

so much confidential business 

information that it cannot be effectively 

redacted, all or part of that comment 

may not be posted online or made 

available in the public docket. 

Personally identifying information 

and confidential business information 

identified and located as set forth above 

will be redacted and the comment, in 

redacted form, will be posted online and 

placed in the Department’s public 

docket file. Please note that the Freedom 

of Information Act applies to all 

comments received. If you wish to 

inspect the agency’s public docket file 

in person by appointment, please see 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

paragraph. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Tricia Francis, Executive Office for 

United States Attorneys, FOIA/Privacy 

Act Staff, 600 E Street NW., Suite 7300, 

Washington, DC 20530, or by facsimile 

at (202) 252–6047. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

notices section of this issue of the 

Federal Register, the Department of 

Justice has published a system of 

records notice for the system entitled, 

‘‘Department of Justice Giglio 

Information Files,’’ JUSTICE/DOJ–017. 

This Department-wide system notice 

replaces the notice for the system 

entitled, ‘‘United States Attorney’s 

Office, Giglio Information Files,’’ 

JUSTICE/USA–018, 65 FR 75308 (Dec. 

1, 2000). That system of records was 

exempt from certain provisions of the 

Privacy Act pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) 

and (k). Those exemptions are codified 

in the Code of Federal Regulations 

(CFR) section for Exemption of United 

States Attorneys Systems (28 CFR 

16.81(g) and (h)). The Department is 

now proposing to establish a new CFR 

section for exemptions of the JUSTICE/ 

DOJ–017 system (28 CFR 16.136) and to 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

15952 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 58 / Thursday, March 26, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

amend 28 CFR 16.81 by removing 

paragraphs (g) and (h). The Department 

intends that the exemptions previously 

established in 28 CFR 16.81(g) and (h) 

will continue to apply to the JUSTICE/ 

USA–018 system and all its records 

until the effective date of 28 CFR 

16.136. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This proposed rule relates to 

individuals as opposed to small 

business entities. Pursuant to the 

requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, the 

proposed rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

Small Entity Inquiries 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 

(SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., requires 

the Department to comply with small 

entity requests for information and 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within the Department’s 

jurisdiction. Any small entity that has a 

question regarding this document may 

contact the person listed in FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. Persons can 

obtain further information regarding 

SBREFA on the Small Business 

Administration’s Web site at http://

www.sba.gov/advocacy/825. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), requires that 

the Department consider the impact of 

paperwork and other informationcollection burdens imposed on the 

public. There are no current or new 

information-collection requirements 

associated with this proposed rule. The 

records that are contributed to this 

system would be created in any event by 

law enforcement entities, and their 

sharing of this information 

electronically will not increase the 

paperwork burden on these entities. 

Analysis of Regulatory Impacts 

This proposed rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ within 

the meaning of Executive Order 12866 

and therefore further regulatory 

evaluation is not necessary. This 

proposed rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities because it 

applies only to information about 

individuals. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 

Law 104–4, 109 Stat. 48, requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

certain regulatory actions on State, 

local, and tribal governments and the 

private sector. UMRA requires a written 

statement of economic and regulatory 

alternatives for proposed and final rules 

that contain Federal mandates. A 

‘‘Federal mandate’’ is a new or 

additional enforceable duty imposed on 

any State, local, or tribal government or 

the private sector. If any Federal 

mandate causes those entities to spend, 

in aggregate, $100 million or more in 

any one year, the UMRA analysis is 

required. This proposed rule would not 

impose Federal mandates on any State, 

local, or tribal government or the private 

sector. 

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 16 

Administrative Practices and 

Procedures, Courts, Freedom of 

Information Act, Government in the 

Sunshine Act, Privacy Act. 

Pursuant to the authority vested in the 

Attorney General by 5 U.S.C. 552a and 

delegated to me by Attorney General 

Order No. 2940–2008 the DOJ proposes 

to amend 28 CFR part 16 as follows: 

PART 16 —[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 16 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a, 

552b(g), 553; 18 U.S.C. 4203(a)(1); 28 U.S.C. 

509, 510, 534; 31 U.S.C. 3717, 9701. 

Subpart E—Exemption of Records 

Systems Under the Privacy Act 

§ 16.81—[AMENDED] 

■ 2. Amend § 16.81 by removing 

paragraphs (g) and (h). 

§ 16.136—[ADDED] 

■ 3. Add § 16.136 to subpart E to read 

as follows: 

§ 16.136 Exemption of the Department of 

Justice, Giglio Information Files, JUSTICE/ 

DOJ–017. 

(a) The Department of Justice, Giglio 

Information Files (JUSTICE/DOJ–017) 

system of records is exempted from 

subsections (c)(3) and (4); (d)(1) through 

(4); (e)(1), (2), (3), (4)(G), (H), and (I), (5), 

and (8); (f); and (g) of the Privacy Act. 

These exemptions apply only to the 

extent that information in this system is 

subject to exemption pursuant to 5 

U.S.C. 552a(j) and/or (k). 

(b) Exemptions from the particular 

subsections are justified for the 

following reasons: 

(1) From subsection (c)(3) of the 

Privacy Act because this subsection is 

inapplicable to the extent that an 

exemption is being claimed for 

subsection (d) of the Privacy Act. 

(2) From subsection (c)(4) of the 

Privacy Act because this subsection is 

inapplicable to the extent that an 

exemption is being claimed for 

subsection (d) of the Privacy Act. 

(3) From subsection (d) of the Privacy 

Act because access to the records 

contained in this system may interfere 

with or impede an ongoing investigation 

as it may be related to allegations 

against an agent or witness who is 

currently being investigated. Further, 

other records that are derivative of the 

subject’s employing agency files may be 

accessed through the employing 

agency’s files. 

(4) From subsection (e)(1) of the 

Privacy Act because it may not be 

possible to determine in advance if 

potential impeachment records 

collected and maintained in order to 

sufficiently meet the Department’s 

Giglio requirements and obligations are 

all relevant and necessary. In order to 

ensure that the Department’s 

prosecutors and investigative agencies 

receive sufficient information to meet 

their obligations under Giglio, it is 

appropriate to maintain potential 

impeachment information in accordance 

with Department policy as such records 

could later be relevant and necessary in 

a different case in which the same 

witness or affiant subsequently testifies. 

(5) From subsection (e)(2) of the 

Privacy Act because collecting 

information directly from the subject 

individual could serve notice that the 

individual is the subject of investigation 

and because of the nature of the records 

in this system, which are used to 

impeach or demonstrate bias of a 

witness, requires that the information be 

collected from others. 

(6) From subsection (e)(3) of the 

Privacy Act because federal law 

enforcement officers receive notice from 

their supervisors and prosecuting 

attorneys that impeachment information 

may be used at trial. Law enforcement 

officers are also given notice by the 

Giglio decision itself. 

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

and (I) of the Privacy Act because this 

system of records is exempt from the 

access and amendment provisions of 

subsection (d) of the Privacy Act. 

(8) From subsection (e)(5) of the 

Privacy Act because it may not be 

possible to determine in advance if all 

potential impeachment records 

collected and maintained in order to 

sufficiently meet the Department’s 

Giglio requirements and obligations are 

all accurate, relevant, timely, and 

complete at the time of collection. 

Although the Department has policies in 

place to verify the records, the records 

may be originated from another agency, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 58 / Thursday, March 26, 2015 / Proposed Rules 15953 

third party, or open source media and 

it may be impossible to ensure the 

accuracy, relevance, timeliness, and 

completeness of potential impeachment 

information maintained prior to and 

during the process of being verified. 

(9) From subsection (e)(8) of the 

Privacy Act because the nature of the 

Giglio discovery process renders notice 

of compliance with the compulsory 

discovery process impractical. 

(10) From subsections (f) and (g) of 

the Privacy Act because these 

subsections are inapplicable to the 

extent that the system is exempt from 

other specific subsections of the Privacy 

Act. 

Dated: March 4, 2015. 

Erika Brown Lee, 

Chief Privacy and Civil Liberties Officer, 

United States Department of Justice. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06938 Filed 3–25–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–FB–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation 

and Enforcement 

30 CFR Part 917 

[SATS No. KY–256–FOR; Docket ID: OSM– 

2012–0014; S1D1SSS08011000SX066A0006

7F154S180110; S2D2SSS08011000SX066

A00033F15XS501520] 

Kentucky Regulatory Program 

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of the 

public comment period and opportunity 

for public hearing. 

SUMMARY: We, the Office of Surface 

Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 

(OSMRE), are reopening the public 

comment period on the proposed 

amendment to the Kentucky regulatory 

program (the Kentucky program) under 

the Surface Mining Control and 

Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the 

Act) that was originally published on 

February 20, 2013. The public comment 

period and opportunity for public 

hearing is being reopened to incorporate 

subsequent information (emergency 

regulations, permanent regulations, 

legislation, and revised statutes) that we 

received from Kentucky to address a 

deficiency in the Kentucky program 

regarding reclamation bonds and to 

revise its program to be administered in 

a manner consistent with SMCRA and 

the Federal regulations. 

This document gives the times and 

locations that this proposed amendment 

to the Kentucky program is available for 

your inspection, the comment period 

during which you may submit written 

comments on the amendment, and the 

procedures that we will follow for the 

public hearing, if one is requested. 

DATES: We will accept written 

comments on the proposed rules until 

4:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time (EST) 

April 27, 2015. If requested, we will 

hold a public hearing on April 20, 2015. 

We will accept requests to speak until 

4:00 p.m., EST on April 10, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by SATS No. KY–256–FOR 

and OSM Docket No. OSM–2012–0004, 

by any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. The proposed rule 

has been assigned Docket ID: OSM– 

2012–0014. Please follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: Mr. Robert Evans, 

bevans@osmre.gov. 

• Fax: (859) 260–8410. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery: Mr. Robert 

Evans, Field Office Director, Lexington 

Field Office, Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement, 2675 

Regency Road, Lexington, Kentucky 

40503. Please include the rule 

identifiers (SATS No. KY–256–FOR and 

Docket ID OSM–2012–0014) with your 

comments. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number for this rulemaking. For 

detailed instructions on submitting 

comments and additional information 

on the rulemaking process, see the 

‘‘Public Comment Procedures’’ heading 

of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

review copies of the Kentucky program, 

this amendment, a listing of any 

scheduled public hearings, and all 

written comments received in response 

to this document, you must go to the 

address listed below during normal 

business hours, Monday through Friday, 

excluding holidays. You may receive 

one free copy of the amendment by 

contacting the person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or the 

full text of the program amendment is 

available for you to read at 

www.regulations.gov. Mr. Robert Evans, 

Field Office Director, Lexington Field 

Office, Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement, 2675 

Regency Road, Lexington, Kentucky 

40503. Telephone: (859) 260–3900. 

Email: bevans@osmre.gov. 

In addition, you may review a copy of 

the amendment during regular business 

hours at the following location: Mr. 

Steve Hohmann, Commissioner, 

Kentucky Department for Natural 

Resources, 2 Hudson Hollow, Frankfort, 

Kentucky 40601. Telephone: (502) 564– 

6940. Email: Steve.Hohmann@ky.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Robert Evans, Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement, 

Telephone: (859) 260–3900. Email: 

bevans@osmre.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background on the Kentucky Program 

II. Description of the Proposed Amendment 

III. Public Comment Procedures 

IV. Procedural Determinations 

I. Background on the Kentucky 

Program 

Section 503(a) of the Act permits a 

State to assume primacy for the 

regulation of surface coal mining and 

reclamation operations on non-Federal 

and non-Indian lands within its borders 

by demonstrating that its program 

includes, among other things, ‘‘* * * 

State law which provides for the 

regulation of surface coal mining and 

reclamation operations in accordance 

with the requirements of this Act * * *; 

and rules and regulations consistent 

with regulations issued by the Secretary 

pursuant to this Act.’’ See 30 U.S.C. 

1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these 

criteria, the Secretary of the Interior 

conditionally approved the Kentucky 

program on May 18, 1982. You can find 

background information on the 

Kentucky program, including the 

Secretary’s findings, the disposition of 

comments, and conditions of approval, 

in the May 18, 1982, Federal Register 

(47 FR 21434). You can also find later 

actions concerning the Kentucky 

program and program amendments at 30 

CFR 917.11–917.17. 

II. Description of the Proposed 

Amendment 

Kentucky submitted information on 

three occasions in response to a Notice 

under 30 CFR part 733 that we sent to 

Kentucky on May 1, 2012 (Docket ID 

OSM–2012–0014) regarding deficiencies 

in its bonding program. These 

submissions are intended to address the 

noted deficiencies and were submitted 

as follows: September 28, 2012 

(emergency and permanent 

administrative regulations), July 5, 2013 

(House Bill (HB) 66 and emergency and 

permanent regulations), and December 

3, 2013 (revised statutes and permanent 

regulations). Below is a summary of 

those submissions. 

A. Kentucky Response (First 

Submission, September 28, 2012): We 

announced receipt of the submission on 

September 28, 2012, (first amendment 

request) in the February 20, 2013 

Federal Register (78 FR 11796). We are 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS