Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 237 / Friday, December 8, 2000 / Notices 76999

prepared by a witness whom the

defense intends to call at trial when the

results or reports relate to that witness’

testimony.’’

Amend the Analysis accompanying

R.C.M. 701(b) by inserting the following

prior to the current paragraph:

‘‘2000 Amendment: Subsection (b)(4)

was amended to also take into

consideration the protections afforded

by the new psychotherapist-patient

privilege under Mil. R. Evid. 513.’’

Amend the analysis accompanying

R.C.M. 707(a) by inserting the following

paragraph after the second full

paragraph:

‘‘2000 Analysis Amendment: Burton

and its progeny were re-examined in

1993 when the Court of Military

Appeals specifically overruled Burton

and reinstated the earlier rule from

United States v. Tibbs, 15 C.M.A. 350,

35 C.M.R. 322 (1965). United States v.

Kossman, 38 M.J. 258 (C.M.A. 1993). In

Kossman, the Court reinstated the

‘‘reasonable diligence’’ standard in

determining whether the prosecution’s

progress toward trial for a confined

accused was sufficient to satisfy the

speedy trial requirement of Article 10,

UCMJ.’’

Amend R.C.M. 1003(b)(3) to read as

follows:

‘‘Fine. Any court-martial may adjudge

a fine in lieu of or in addition to

forfeitures. Special and summary courtsmartial may not adjudge any fine or

combination of fine and forfeitures in

excess of the total amount of forfeitures

that may be adjudged in that case. In

order to enforce collection, a fine may

be accompanied by a provision in the

sentence that, in the event the fine is not

paid, the person fined shall, in addition

to any period of confinement adjudged,

be further confined until a fixed period

considered an equivalent punishment to

the fine has expired. The total period of

confinement so adjudged shall not

exceed the jurisdictional limitations of

the court-martial;’’

Amend the Discussion accompanying

R.C.M. 1003(b)(3) by adding the

following after the second paragraph:

‘‘Where the sentence adjudged at a

special court-martial includes a fine, see

R.C.M. 1107(d)(5) for limitations on

convening authority action on the

sentence.’’

Amend the Analysis accompanying

R.C.M. 1003(b)(3) by inserting the

following before the discussion of

subsection (b)(4):

‘‘2000 Amendment: The amendment

clearly defines the authority of special

and summary courts-martial to adjudge

both fines and forfeitures. See generally,

United States v. Tualla, 52 M.J. 228

(2000).’’

Add R.C.M. 1107(d)(5) as follows:

‘‘Limitations on sentence of a special

court-martial where a fine has been

adjudged. A convening authority may

not approve in its entirety a sentence

adjudged at a special court-martial

where, when approved, the cumulative

impact of the fine and forfeitures,

whether adjudged or by operation of

Article 58b, UCMJ, would exceed the

jurisdictional maximum dollar amount

of forfeitures that may be adjudged at

that court-martial.’’

Amend the Analysis accompanying

R.C.M. 1107(d) by inserting the

following before the discussion of

subsection (e):

‘‘2000 Amendment: Subparagraph

(d)(5). This subparagraph is new. The

amendment addresses the impact of

Article 58b, UCMJ. In special courtsmartial, where the cumulative impact of

a fine and forfeitures, whether adjudged

or by operation of Article 58b, would

otherwise exceed the total dollar

amount of forfeitures that could be

adjudged at the special court-martial,

the fine and/or adjudged forfeitures

should be disapproved or decreased

accordingly. See generally, United

States v. Tualla, 52 M.J. 228, 231–32

(2000).’’

Dated: November 30, 2000.

L.M. Bynum,

Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison

Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 00–31247 Filed 12–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001–10–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

Defense Science Board; Meeting

ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee

Meetings.

SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board

will meet in closed session on March 7–

8, 2001; May 16–17, 2001; and October

24–25, 2001, at the Pentagon, Arlington,

Virginia.

The mission of the Defense Science

Board is to advise the Secretary of

Defense and the Under Secretary of

Defense for Acquisition, Technology &

Logistics on scientific and technical

matters as they affect the perceived

needs of the Department of Defense. At

these meetings, the Defense Science

Board will discuss interim findings and

recommendations resulting from

ongoing Task Force activities. The

Board will also discuss plans for future

consideration of scientific and technical

aspects of specific strategies, tactics, and

policies as they may affect the U.S.

national defense posture.

In accordance with Section 10(d) of

the Federal Advisory Committee Act,

P.L. No. 92–463, as amended (5 U.S.C.

App. II, (1994)), it has been determined

that these Defense Science Board

meetings concern matters listed in 5

U.S.C. § 552b(c)(1)(1994), and that

accordingly these meetings will be

closed to the public.

Dated: November 30, 2000.

L.M. Bynum,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison

Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 00–31241 Filed 12–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001–10–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

Privacy Act of 1974; System of

Records

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DoD.

ACTION: Notice to alter a system of

records.

SUMMARY: The Office of the Secretary of

Defense proposes to alter a system of

records notices in its inventory of record

systems subject to the Privacy Act of

1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended. The

system of records identified as DHA 05,

Military Depolyment Issues Files, is

being altered to add two routine uses.

DATES: The changes will be effective on

January 8, 2001 unless comments are

received that would result in a contrary

determination.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to OSD

Privacy Act Coordinator, Records

Management Division, Washington

Headquarters Services, 1155 Defense

Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301–1155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

David Bosworth at (703) 601–4725.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office

of the Secretary of Defense notices for

systems of records subject to the Privacy

Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended,

have been published in the Federal

Register and are available from the

address above.

The proposed system report, as

required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(r) of the

Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, was

submitted on November 30, 2000, to the

House Committee on Government

Reform, the Senate Committee on

Governmental Affairs, and the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB)

pursuant to paragraph 4c of Appendix I

to OMB Circular No. A–130, ‘Federal

Agency Responsibilities for Maintaining

Records About Individuals,’ dated