26120 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

must be furnished by mail or in person 

if— 

(A) An electronic notice of the Web 

site posting of an original statement or 

the corrected statement was returned as 

undeliverable; and 

(B) The recipient has not provided a 

new email address. 

(6) Access period. Statements 

furnished on a Web site must be 

retained on the Web site through 

October 15 of the year following the 

calendar year to which the statements 

relate (or the first business day after 

October 15, if October 15 falls on a 

Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday). The 

furnisher must maintain access to 

corrected statements that are posted on 

the Web site through October 15 of the 

year following the calendar year to 

which the statements relate (or the first 

business day after October 15, if October 

15 falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal 

holiday) or the date 90 days after the 

corrected forms are posted, whichever is 

later. 

(7) Paper statements after withdrawal 

of consent. An Exchange must furnish a 

paper statement if a recipient withdraws 

consent to receive a statement 

electronically and the withdrawal takes 

effect before the statement is furnished. 

A paper statement furnished under this 

paragraph (g)(7) after the statement due 

date is timely if furnished within 30 

days after the date the Exchange 

receives the withdrawal of consent. 

John Dalrymple, 

Deputy Commissioner for Services and 

Enforcement. 

Approved: May 1, 2014. 

Mark J. Mazur, 

Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax 

Policy). 

[FR Doc. 2014–10419 Filed 5–2–14; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

32 CFR Part 320 

[Docket ID: DoD–2014–OS–0026] 

Privacy Act; Implementation 

AGENCY: National GeospatialIntelligence Agency (NGA), DoD. 

ACTION: Direct final rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: National GeospatialIntelligence Agency (NGA) is updating 

the NGA Privacy Act Program regarding 

NGA Threat Mitigation Records. 

Additionally, NGA initiated a 

rulemaking to exempt this system of 

records from a number of provisions of 

the Privacy Act, because this system 

may contain records or information 

recompiled from or created from 

information contained in other systems 

of records, which are exempt from 

certain provisions of the Privacy Act. 

For these records or information only, 

NGA will also claim the original 

exemptions for these records or 

information from the Privacy Act of 

1974, as amended, as necessary and 

appropriate to protect such information. 

Such exempt records or information 

may be law enforcement or national 

security investigation records, law 

enforcement activity and encounter 

records. 

DATES: The rule is effective on July 16, 

2014 unless adverse comments are 

received by July 7, 2014. If adverse 

comment is received, the Department of 

Defense will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the rule in the Federal 

Register. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number and title, 

by any of the following methods: 

* Federal Rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments. 

* Mail: Federal Docket Management 

System Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive; 

East Tower, 2nd Floor, Suite 02G09, 

Alexandria, VA 22350–3100. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number 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: 

National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency 

(NGA), ATTN: Security Specialist, 

Mission Support, MSRS P–12, 7500 

GEOINT Drive, Springfield, VA 22150. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

direct final rule makes non-substantive 

changes to the NGA rules. This will 

improve the efficiency and effectiveness 

of DoD’s program by ensuring the 

integrity of the security and 

counterintelligence records by the NGA 

and the Department of Defense. 

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. 

National Geospatial-Intelligence 

Agency (NGA) is updating the NGA 

Privacy Act Program by adding the 

(k)(1) and (k)(5) exemptions to NGA– 

004, NGA Threat Mitigation Records. 

Additionally, NGA initiated a 

rulemaking to exempt this system of 

records from a number of provisions of 

the Privacy Act, because this system 

may contain records or information 

recompiled from or created from 

information contained in other systems 

of records, which are exempt from 

certain provisions of the Privacy Act. 

For these records or information only, in 

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), 

(k)(2), (k)(1), and (k)(5), NGA will also 

claim the original exemptions for these 

records or information from subsections 

(c)(3) and (4); (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4); 

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

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

1974, as amended, as necessary and 

appropriate to protect such information. 

Such exempt records or information 

may be law enforcement or national 

security investigation records, law 

enforcement activity and encounter 

records. 

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 Programs. 

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. This rule does 

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 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 26121 

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. A Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis is not required. 

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 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

Section 202, Public Law 104–4, 

‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’ 

It has been determined that Privacy 

Act rules for the Department of Defense 

do 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. Therefore, 

no Federalism assessment is required. 

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 320 

Privacy. 

Accordingly, 32 CFR part 320 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 320—NATIONAL GEOSPATIALINTELLIGENCE AGENCY (NGA) 

■ 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR 

part 320 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat. 1896 

(5 U.S.C. 552a). 

■ 2. In § 320.12, revise paragraph (c) to 

read as follows: 

§ 320.12 Exemptions. 

* * * * * 

(c) System identifier and name: NGA– 

004, NGA Threat Mitigation Records. 

(1) Exemptions: Exempt materials 

from JUSTICE/FBI—019 Terrorist 

Screening Records System may become 

part of the case records in this system 

of records. To the extent that copies of 

exempt records from JUSTICE/FBI— 

019, Terrorist Screening Records System 

are entered into these Threat Mitigation 

case records, NGA hereby claims the 

same exemptions (j)(2) and (k)(2), for the 

records as claimed in JUSTICE/FBI— 

019, Terrorist Screening Records system 

of records of which they are a part. 

(2) Information specifically 

authorized to be classified under E.O. 

12958, as implemented by DoD 5200.1– 

R, may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

552a(k)(1). 

(3) Investigative material compiled 

solely for the purpose of determining 

suitability, eligibility, or qualifications 

for federal civilian employment, 

military service, 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 identity of a 

confidential source. 

(4) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), 

(k)(1), (k)(2) and (k)(5). 

(5) Reasons: (i) Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

552a(j)(2), (k)(2), and (k)(5) NGA is 

claiming the following exemptions for 

certain records within the Threat 

Mitigation Records system: 5 U.S.C. 

552a(c)(3) and (4); (d)(1), (2), (3), and 

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

and (8); (f), and (g). Additionally, 

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1) and 

(k)(2), NGA has exempted this system 

from the following provisions of the 

Privacy Act, subject to the limitation set 

forth in 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1), 

(e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I); and (f). 

Exemptions from these particular 

subsections are justified, on a case-bycase basis to be determined at the time 

a request is made. 

(ii) In addition to records under the 

control of NGA, the Threat Mitigation 

system of records may include records 

originating from systems of records of 

other law enforcement and intelligence 

agencies which may be exempt from 

certain provisions of the Privacy Act. 

However, NGA does not assert 

exemption to any provisions of the 

Privacy Act with respect to information 

submitted by or on behalf of 

individuals. 

(iii) To the extent the Threat 

Mitigation system contains records 

originating from other systems of 

records, NGA will rely on the 

exemptions claimed for those records in 

the originating system of records. 

Exemptions for certain records within 

the Threat Mitigation system from 

particular subsections of the Privacy Act 

are justified for the following reasons: 

(A) From subsection (c)(3) 

(Accounting for Disclosures) because 

giving a record subject access to the 

accounting of disclosures from records 

concerning him or her could reveal 

investigative interest on the part of the 

recipient agency that obtained the 

record pursuant to a routine use. 

Disclosure of the accounting could 

therefore present a serious impediment 

to law enforcement efforts on the part of 

the recipient agency because the 

individual who is the subject of the 

record would learn of third agency 

investigative interests and could take 

steps to evade detection or 

apprehension. Disclosure of the 

accounting also could reveal the details 

of watch list matching measures under 

the Threat Mitigation system, as well as 

capabilities and vulnerabilities of the 

watch list matching process, the release 

of which could permit an individual to 

evade future detection and thereby 

impede efforts to ensure security. 

(B) From subsection (c)(4) because 

portions of this system are exempt from 

the access and amendment provisions of 

subsection (d). 

(C) From subsection (d) (Access to 

Records) because access to the records 

contained in this system of records 

could inform the subject of an 

investigation of an actual or potential 

criminal, civil, or regulatory violation to 

the existence of that investigation and 

reveal investigative interest on the part 

of Department of Homeland Security or 

another agency. Access to the records 

could permit the individual who is the 

subject of a record to impede the 

investigation, to tamper with witnesses 

or evidence, and to avoid detection or 

apprehension. Amendment of the 

records could interfere with ongoing 

investigations and law enforcement 

activities and would impose an 

unreasonable administrative burden by 

requiring investigations to be 

continually reinvestigated. In addition, 

permitting access and amendment to 

such information could disclose 

security-sensitive information that 

could be detrimental to national 

security. 

(D) From subsection (e)(1) because it 

is not always possible for NGA or other 

agencies to know in advance what 

information is both relevant and 

necessary for it to complete an identity 

comparison between individuals and a 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
26122 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

known or suspected terrorist. In 

addition, because NGA and other 

agencies may not always know what 

information about an encounter with a 

known or suspected terrorist will be 

relevant to law enforcement for the 

purpose of conducting an operational 

response. 

(E) From subsection (e)(2) because 

application of this provision could 

present a serious impediment to 

counterterrorism, law enforcement, or 

intelligence efforts in that it would put 

the subject of an investigation, study or 

analysis on notice of that fact, thereby 

permitting the subject to engage in 

conduct designed to frustrate or impede 

that activity. The nature of 

counterterrorism, law enforcement, or 

intelligence investigations is such that 

vital information about an individual 

frequently can be obtained only from 

other persons who are familiar with 

such individual and his/her activities. 

In such investigations, it is not feasible 

to rely upon information furnished by 

the individual concerning his own 

activities. 

(F) From subsection (e)(3), to the 

extent that this subsection is interpreted 

to require NGA to provide notice to an 

individual if NGA or another agency 

receives or collects information about 

that individual during an investigation 

or from a third party. Should the 

subsection be so interpreted, exemption 

from this provision is necessary to avoid 

impeding counterterrorism, law 

enforcement, or intelligence efforts by 

putting the subject of an investigation, 

study or analysis on notice of that fact, 

thereby permitting the subject to engage 

in conduct intended to frustrate or 

impede that activity. 

(G) From subsections (e)(4)(G) and (H) 

and (I) (Agency Requirements) and (f) 

(Agency Rules), because this system is 

exempt from the access provisions of 5 

U.S.C. 552a(d). 

(H) From subsection (e)(5) because 

many of the records in this system 

coming from other system of records are 

derived from other agency record 

systems and therefore it is not possible 

for NGA to ensure their compliance 

with this provision, however, NGA has 

implemented internal quality assurance 

procedures to ensure that data used in 

the matching process is as thorough, 

accurate, and current as possible. In 

addition, in the collection of 

information for law enforcement, 

counterterrorism, and intelligence 

purposes, it is impossible to determine 

in advance what information is 

accurate, relevant, timely, and complete. 

With the passage of time, seemingly 

irrelevant or untimely information may 

acquire new significance as further 

investigation brings new details to light. 

The restrictions imposed by (e)(5) 

would limit the ability of those 

agencies’ trained investigators and 

intelligence analysts to exercise their 

judgment in conducting investigations 

and impede the development of 

intelligence necessary for effective law 

enforcement and counterterrorism 

efforts. However, NGA has implemented 

internal quality assurance procedures to 

ensure that the data used in the 

matching process is as thorough, 

accurate, and current as possible. 

(I) From subsection (e)(8) because to 

require individual notice of disclosure 

of information due to compulsory legal 

process would pose an impossible 

administrative burden on NGA and 

other agencies and could alert the 

subjects of counterterrorism, law 

enforcement, or intelligence 

investigations to the fact of those 

investigations when not previously 

known. 

(J) From subsection (f) (Agency Rules) 

because portions of this system are 

exempt from the access and amendment 

provisions of subsection (d). 

(K) From subsection (g) to the extent 

that the system is exempt from other 

specific subsections of the Privacy Act. 

* * * * * 

Dated: May 2, 2014. 

Aaron Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2014–10432 Filed 5–6–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2014–0175] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone: Tiburon’s 50th 

Anniversary Fireworks, San Francisco 

Bay, Tiburon, CA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary safety zone in 

the navigable waters of the San 

Francisco Bay near Point Tiburon in 

support of the Town of Tiburon’s 50th 

Anniversary Fireworks celebration on 

May 30, 2014. This safety zone is 

established to ensure the safety of 

participants and spectators from the 

dangers associated with pyrotechnics. 

Unauthorized persons or vessels are 

prohibited from entering into, transiting 

through, or remaining in the safety zone 

without permission of the Captain of the 

Port or their designated representative. 

DATES: This rule is effective from 11 

a.m. to 9:45 p.m. on May 30, 2014. This 

rule will be enforced from 11 a.m. to 

9:45 p.m. on May 30, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in 

this preamble are part of docket USCG– 

2014–0175. To view documents 

mentioned in this preamble as being 

available in the docket, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, type the docket 

number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click 

‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket 

Folder on the line associated with this 

rulemaking. You may also visit the 

Docket Management Facility in Room 

W12–140 on the ground floor of the 

Department of Transportation West 

Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

email Lieutenant Junior Grade William 

J. Hawn, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San 

Francisco; telephone (415) 399–7442 or 

email at D11-PFMarineEvents@uscg.mil. If you have 

questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Barbara 

Hairston, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone (202) 366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Acronyms 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

A. Regulatory History and Information 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary final rule without prior 

notice and opportunity to comment 

pursuant to authority under section 4(a) 

of the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision 

authorizes an agency to issue a rule 

without prior notice and opportunity to 

comment when the agency for good 

cause finds that those procedures are 

‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest.’’ 

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast 

Guard finds that good cause exists for 

making this rule effective less than 30 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register. The Coast Guard received the 

information about the fireworks display 

on March 7, 2014, and the fireworks 

display would occur before the 

rulemaking process would be 

completed. Because of the dangers 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES