[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 155 (Friday, August 11, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46180-46181]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-6848]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Defense Logistics Agency

32 CFR Part 323

[Docket: DoD-2006-OS-0022]
RIN 0790-AI00


Privacy Act; Implementation

AGENCY: Defense Logistics Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) is proposing to update the 
DLA Privacy Act Program Rules, 32 CFR, part 323, by replacing the 
(k)(2) exemption with a (k)(5) exemption to more accurately describe 
the basis for exempting the records.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 10, 2006 to be 
considered by this agency.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and or 
RIN number and title, by any of the following methods.
    <bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    <bullet> Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 1160 
Defense Pentagon, 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://regulations.gov 
as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers 
or contact information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Jody Sinkler at (703) 767-5045.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning 
and 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 this Executive 
Order.
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 information requirements beyond the Department of 
Defense and that the information collected within the Department of 
Defense is necessary and consistent with 5 U.S.C. 552a, known as the 
Privacy Act of 1974.
Section 202, Public Law 104-4, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act''
    It has been determined that 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 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 323

    Privacy.

    Accordingly, 32 CFR part 323 is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 323--DLA PRIVACY ACT PROGRAM

    1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 323 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Public Law 93-579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a).

    2. Appendix H to part 323 is amended by revising the current 
paragraphs a.1. through a.4. with the following:

Appendix H to Part 323, DLA Exemption Rules

* * * * *

a. ID: S500.10 (Specific Exemption)

    1. System name: Personnel Security Files.
    2. Exemption: Investigatory material compiled solely for the 
purpose of determining suitability, eligibility, or qualifications 
for federal civilian employment, federal contracts, or access to 
classified information may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 
552a(k)(5), but only to the extent that such material would reveal 
the identify of a confidential source. Therefore, portions of this 
system may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5) from the 
following subsections of 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), (d), and (e)(1).
    3. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5).
    4. Reasons: (i) From subsection (c)(3) and (d) when access to 
accounting disclosures and access to or amendment of records would 
cause the identity of a confidential source to be revealed. 
Disclosure of the source's identity not only will result in the 
Department breaching the promise of confidentiality made to the 
source but it will impair the Department's future ability to compile 
investigatory material for the purpose of determining suitability, 
eligibility, or qualifications for Federal civilian employment, 
Federal contracts, or access to classified information. Unless 
sources can be assured that a promise of confidentiality will be 
honored, they will be less likely to

[[Page 46181]]

provide information considered essential to the Department in making 
the required determinations.
    (ii) From (e)(1) because in the collection of information for 
investigatory purposes, it is not always possible to determine the 
relevance and necessity of particular information in the early 
stages of the investigation. In some cases, it is only after the 
information is evaluated in light of other information that its 
relevance and necessity becomes clear. Such information permits more 
informed decision-making by the Department when making required 
suitability, eligibility, and qualification determinations.
* * * * *

    Dated: August 7, 2006.
C.R. Choate,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 06-6848 Filed 8-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M