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

13 This 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 orinternational relations. (Active nonlethal systems include laser optical distracters, acoustic hailing devices,electro-muscular TASER guns, blunttrauma devices like rubber balls andsponge 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


### 49659 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

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.