49658 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

13This requirement is specific to arming 

procedures. Such written acknowledgement should 

not be construed to limit potential civil and 

criminal liability to conduct arising from ‘‘the use 

of weapons.’’ For example, PSC personnel could be 

held criminally liable for any conduct that would 

constitute a Federal offense (see MEJA, 18 U.S.C. 

3261(a)). 

or host nation prosecution and civil 

liability.13

(2) Proof of authorization to be armed 

must be carried by each PSC personnel. 

(3) PSC personnel may possess only 

U.S.G.-issued and/or -approved 

weapons and ammunition for which 

they have been qualified according to 

paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(E) of this section. 

(4) PSC personnel were briefed about 

and understand limitations on the use of 

force. 

(5) Authorization to possess weapons 

and ammunition may be revoked for 

non-compliance with established rules 

for the use of force. 

(6) PSC personnel are prohibited from 

consuming alcoholic beverages or being 

under the influence of alcohol while 

armed. 

(iv) Registration and identification in 

the Synchronized Predeployment and 

Operational Tracker (or its successor 

database) of armored vehicles, 

helicopters, and other vehicles operated 

by PSC personnel. 

(v) Reporting alleged criminal activity 

or other incidents involving PSCs or 

PSC personnel by another company or 

any other person. All incidents 

involving the following shall be 

reported and documented: 

(A) A weapon is discharged by an 

individual performing private security 

functions; 

(B) An individual performing private 

security functions is killed or injured in 

the performance of their duties; 

(C) A person other than an individual 

performing private security functions is 

killed or injured as a result of conduct 

by PSC personnel; 

(D) Property is destroyed as a result of 

conduct by a PSC or PSC personnel; 

(E) An individual performing private 

security functions has come under 

attack including in cases where a 

weapon is discharged against an 

individual performing private security 

functions or personnel performing such 

functions believe a weapon was so 

discharged; or 

(F) Active, non-lethal countermeasures (other than the discharge of a 

weapon) are employed by PSC 

personnel in response to a perceived 

immediate threat in an incident that 

could significantly affect U.S. objectives 

with regard to the military mission or 

international relations. (Active nonlethal systems include laser optical 

distracters, acoustic hailing devices, 

electro-muscular TASER guns, blunttrauma devices like rubber balls and 

sponge grenades, and a variety of riotcontrol agents and delivery systems). 

(vi) The independent review and, if 

practicable, investigation of incidents 

reported pursuant to paragraphs 

(a)(1)(v)(A) through (a)(1)(v)(F) of this 

section and incidents of alleged 

misconduct by PSC personnel. 

(vii) Identification of ultimate 

criminal jurisdiction and investigative 

responsibilities, where conduct of 

U.S.G.-funded PSCs or PSC personnel 

are in question, in accordance with 

applicable laws to include a recognition 

of investigative jurisdiction and 

coordination for joint investigations 

(i.e., other U.S.G. agencies, host nation, 

or third country agencies), where the 

conduct of PSCs and PSC personnel is 

in question. 

(viii) A mechanism by which a 

commander of a combatant command 

may request an action by which PSC 

personnel who are non-compliant with 

contract requirements are removed from 

the designated operational area. 

(ix) Interagency coordination of 

administrative penalties or removal, as 

appropriate, of non-DoD PSC personnel 

who fail to comply with the terms and 

conditions of their contract, as they 

relate to this part. 

(x) Implementation of the training 

requirements contained below in 

paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section. 

(2) Specifically cover: 

(i) Matters relating to authorized 

equipment, force protection, security, 

health, safety, and relations and 

interaction with locals in accordance 

with DoD Instruction 3020.41, 

‘‘Contractor Personnel Authorized to 

Accompany the U.S. Armed Forces.’’ 

(ii) Predeployment training 

requirements addressing, at a minimum, 

the identification of resources and 

assistance available to PSC personnel as 

well as country information and cultural 

training, and guidance on working with 

host country nationals and military 

personnel. 

(iii) Rules for the use of force and 

graduated force procedures. 

(iv) Requirements and procedures for 

direction, control and the maintenance 

of communications with regard to the 

movement and coordination of PSCs 

and PSC personnel, including 

specifying interoperability 

requirements. These include 

coordinating with the Chief of Mission, 

as necessary, private security operations 

outside secure bases and U.S. 

diplomatic properties to include 

movement control procedures for all 

contractors, including PSC personnel. 

(b) Availability of Guidance and 

Procedures. The geographic Combatant 

Commander shall ensure the guidance 

and procedures prescribed in paragraph 

(a) of this section are readily available 

and accessible by PSCs and their 

personnel (e.g., on a Web page and/or 

through contract terms), consistent with 

security considerations and 

requirements. 

(c) Subordinate Guidance and 

Procedures. A sub unified commander 

or JFC, in consultation with the Chief of 

Mission, will issue guidance and 

procedures implementing the standing 

combatant command publications 

specified in paragraph (a) of this 

section, consistent with the situation 

and operating environment. 

(d) Consultation and Coordination. 

The Chief of Mission and the geographic 

Combatant Commander/sub unified 

commander or JFC shall make every 

effort to consult and coordinate 

responses to common threats and 

common concerns related to oversight of 

the conduct of U.S.G.-funded PSCs and 

their personnel. 

Dated: August 3, 2011. 

Patricia L. Toppings, 

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, 

Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2011–20239 Filed 8–10–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

32 CFR Part 319 

[Docket ID DOD–2011–OS–0022] 

Privacy Act; Implementation 

AGENCY: Defense Intelligence Agency, 

DoD. 

ACTION: Direct final rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Defense Intelligence 

Agency is deleting an exemption rule 

for LDIA 0275, ‘‘DoD Hotline Referrals’’ 

in its entirety. This direct final rule 

makes nonsubstantive changes to the 

Defense Intelligence Agency Privacy 

Program rules. These changes will allow 

the Department to transfer these records 

to another system of records LDIA 0271, 

‘‘Investigations and Complaints’’ (July 

19, 2006, 71 FR 41006). This will 

improve the efficiency and effectiveness 

of DoD’s program by preserving the 

exempt status of the records when the 

purposes underlying the exemption are 

valid and necessary to protect the 

contents of the records. This rule is 

being published as a direct final rule as 

the Department of Defense does not 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 49659 

expect to receive any adverse 

comments, and so a proposed rule is 

unnecessary. 

DATES: The rule will be effective on 

October 20, 2011 unless comments are 

received that would result in a contrary 

determination. Comments will be 

accepted on or before October 11, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number and title, 

by any of the following methods. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Federal Docket management 

System Office, 1160 Defense Pentagon, 

Room 3C843, Washington, DC 20301– 

1160. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number or Regulatory 

Information Number (RIN) 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 

http://www.regulations.gov as they are 

received without change, including any 

personal identifiers or contact 

information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Theresa Lowery at (202) 231–1193. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Direct Final Rule and Significant 

Adverse Comments 

DoD has determined this rulemaking 

meets the criteria for a direct final rule 

because it involves nonsubstantive 

changes dealing with DoD’s 

management of its Privacy Progams. 

DoD expects no opposition to the 

changes and no significant adverse 

comments. However, if DoD receives a 

significant adverse comment, the 

Department will withdraw this direct 

final rule by publishing a notice in the 

Federal Register. A significant adverse 

comment is one that explains: (1) Why 

the direct final rule is inappropriate, 

including challenges to the rule’s 

underlying premise or approach; or 

(2) why the direct final rule will be 

ineffective or unacceptable without a 

change. In determining whether a 

comment necessitates withdrawal of 

this direct final rule, DoD will consider 

whether it warrants a substantive 

response in a notice and comment 

process. 

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ and Executive 

Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory 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 these Executive orders. 

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 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 additional information 

collection requirements on the public 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995. 

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 do 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 319 

Privacy. 

Accordingly, 32 CFR 319 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 319—DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE 

AGENCY PRIVACY PROGRAM 

■ 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR 

part 319 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 5 U.S.C. 552a(f) 

and (k). 

■ 2. In § 319.13 remove and reserve 

paragraph (d) to read as follows: 

§ 319.13 Specific exemptions. 

* * * * * 

(d) [Reserved]. 

* * * * * 

Dated: July 8, 2011. 

Patricia L. Toppings, 

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, 

Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2011–20238 Filed 8–10–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

32 CFR Part 319 

[Docket ID DOD–2011–OS–0087] 

Privacy Act; Implementation 

AGENCY: Defense Intelligence Agency, 

DoD. 

ACTION: Direct final rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Defense Intelligence 

Agency (DIA) is adding a new 

exemption rule for LDIA 0900, entitled 

‘‘Accounts Receivable, Indebtedness 

and Claims’’ to exempt those records 

that have been previously claimed for 

the records in another Privacy Act 

system of records. To the extent that 

copies of exempt records from those 

other systems of records are entered into 

these case records, DIA hereby claims 

the same exemptions for the records as 

claimed in the original primary system 

of records of which they are a part. This 

direct final rule makes nonsubstantive 

changes to the Defense Intelligence 

Agency Program rules. These changes 

will allow the Department to exempt 

records from certain portions of the 

Privacy Act. This will improve the 

efficiency and effectiveness of DoD’s 

program by preserving the exempt status 

of the records when the purposes 

underlying the exemption for the 

original records are still valid and 

necessary to protect the contents of the 

records. This rule is being published as 

a direct final rule as the Department of 

Defense does not expect to receive any 

adverse comments, and so a proposed 

rule is unnecessary. 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with RULES