Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 4, 2015 / Notices 6057 

Dated: January 29, 2015. 

Glenna Mickelson, 

Management Analyst, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2015–02087 Filed 2–3–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–60–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

[Docket ID: DoD–2015–OS–0010] 

Manual for Courts-Martial; Proposed 

Amendments 

AGENCY: Joint Service Committee (JSC) 

on Military Justice, DoD. 

ACTION: Annual Review of the Manual 

for Courts-Martial, United States. 

SUMMARY: The JSC is conducting its 

annual review of the Manual for CourtsMartial (MCM), United States. The 

committee invites members of the 

public to suggest changes to the MCM. 

Please provide supporting rationale for 

any proposed changes. 

In light of the significant changes to 

the military justice system resulting 

from the National Defense 

Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years 2014 

and 2015, the JSC will not consider 

proposed changes submitted prior to 

October 1, 2014 during this annual 

review. If the proponent of any 

proposed change submitted prior to 

October 1, 2014 would like a previously 

submitted proposal to be considered by 

the JSC, it must be resubmitted as 

explained in this notice. 

DATES: Proposed changes must be 

received no later than April 6, 2015. 

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, 4800 Mark Center Drive, 

East Tower, 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: 

Captain Harlye S. Carlton, USMC, 

Executive Secretary, JSC, at (703) 693– 

9299 or via email at harlye.carlton@

usmc.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The JSC is 

conducting this annual review of the 

MCM pursuant to Executive Order 

12473—Manual for Courts-Martial, 

United States, 1984, and Department of 

Defense Directive 5500.17, Role and 

Responsibility of the Joint Service 

Committee (JSC) on Military Justice. 

Dated: January 30, 2015. 

Aaron Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2015–02126 Filed 2–3–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

[Docket ID: DoD–2014–OS–0140] 

Manual for Courts-Martial; Proposed 

Amendments 

AGENCY: Joint Service Committee on 

Military Justice (JSC), Department of 

Defense. 

ACTION: Notice of response to public 

comments on proposed amendments to 

the Manual for Courts-Martial, United 

States (2012 ed.). 

SUMMARY: The Joint Service Committee 

on Military Justice (JSC) is publishing 

final proposed amendments to the 

Manual for Courts-Martial, United 

States (MCM). The proposed changes 

concern the rules of evidence and the 

punitive articles applicable in trials by 

courts-martial. These proposed changes 

have not been coordinated within the 

Department of Defense under DoD 

Directive 5500.1, ‘‘Preparation, 

Processing and Coordinating 

Legislation, Executive Orders, 

Proclamations, Views Letters and 

Testimony,’’ June 15, 2007, and do not 

constitute the official position of the 

Department of Defense, the Military 

Departments, or any other Government 

agency. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Capt 

Harlye S. Carlton, USMC, (703) 963– 

9299 or harlye.carlton@usmc.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On October 3, 2014 (79 FR 59938– 

59959), the JSC published a Notice of 

Proposed Amendments concerning the 

rules of procedure and evidence and the 

punitive articles applicable in trials by 

courts-martial and a Notice of Public 

Meeting to receive comments on these 

proposals. The public meeting was held 

on October 29, 2014. Two members of 

the public provided oral comments at 

the public meeting, with one of the 

members of the public also submitting 

a written comment. Additionally, 

several written comments were received 

electronically. All comments were 

considered by the JSC. 

Public Comments: Comments and 

materials received from the public are 

available under Docket ID Number 

DoD–2014–OS–0140–0001, Federal 

Register Number 2014–23546, and at 

the following link http://www.

regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=

DOD-2014-OS-0140-0001. 

Discussion of Comments and Changes 

The JSC considered each public 

comment and made some modifications 

to the proposed amendments 

accordingly. Additionally, the JSC 

added proposed amendments to 

implement provisions in the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2015, Public Law 113–291, 

December 19, 2014 (FY15 NDAA). 

Comments that were submitted that are 

outside the scope of these proposed 

changes will be considered as part of the 

JSC’s 2015 annual review of the MCM. 

The JSC will forward the public 

comments and proposed amendments to 

the Department of Defense. The public 

comments regarding the proposed 

changes and a summary of proposed 

amendments to implement FY15 NDAA 

provisions follow: 

a. Several comments recommended 

adding a requirement to RCM 305(i) that 

a neutral and detached officer should 

inquire whether a victim has been 

contacted and provided the opportunity 

to be heard during the 7-day review of 

pretrial confinement. Comments also 

recommended that a neutral and 

detached officer should inquire whether 

the victim has waived the right to be 

heard. The JSC has adopted this 

proposal in part as follows: 

—R.C.M. 305(i)(2)(D) is amended to 

read as follows: 

‘‘Memorandum. The 7-day reviewing 

officer’s conclusions, including the factual 

findings on which they are based, shall be set 

forth in a written memorandum. The 

memorandum shall also state whether the 

victim was notified of the review, was given 

the opportunity to confer with the 

representative of the command or counsel for 

the government, and was given a reasonable 

opportunity to be heard. A copy of the 

memorandum and all documents considered 

by the 7-day reviewing officer shall be 

maintained in accordance with regulations 

prescribed by the Secretary concerned and 

provided to the accused or the Government 

on request.’’ 

b. Two comments recommended 

amending RCM 702 to clarify that the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

6058 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 4, 2015 / Notices 

right of a victim not to testify at the 

Article 32 preliminary hearing may not 

be circumvented by ordering a pretrial 

deposition. The JSC has adopted this 

proposal in part and proposed 

additional amendments to RCM 702 to 

implement Section 532 of the FY15 

NDAA as follows: 

—R.C.M. 702(a) is amended to read as 

follows: 

‘‘(a) In general. A deposition may be 

ordered whenever, after preferral of charges, 

due to exceptional circumstances of the case 

it is in the interest of justice that the 

testimony of a prospective witness be taken 

and preserved for use at a preliminary 

hearing under Article 32 or a court-martial. 

A victim’s declination to testify at a 

preliminary hearing or a victim’s declination 

to submit to pretrial interviews shall not, by 

themselves, be considered exceptional 

circumstances. In accordance with 

subsection (b) of this rule below, the 

convening authority or military judge may 

order a deposition of a victim only if it is 

determined, by a preponderance of the 

evidence, that the victim will not be available 

to testify at court-martial.’’ 

—R.C.M. 702(c)(2) is amended to read 

as follows: 

‘‘(2) Contents of request. A request for a 

deposition shall include: 

(A) The name and address of the person 

whose deposition is requested, or, if the 

name of the person is unknown, a 

description of the office or position of the 

person; 

(B) A statement of the matters on which the 

person is to be examined; and 

(C) Whether an oral or written deposition 

is requested.’’ 

—R.C.M. 702(c)(3)(A) is amended to 

read as follows: 

‘‘(A) Upon receipt of a request for a 

deposition, the convening authority or 

military judge shall determine whether the 

requesting party has shown, by a 

preponderance of the evidence, that due to 

exceptional circumstances and in the interest 

of justice, the testimony of the prospective 

witness must be taken and preserved for use 

at a preliminary hearing under Article 32 or 

court-martial.’’ 

—R.C.M. 702(d)(1) is amended to read 

as follows: 

‘‘(1) Detail of deposition officer. When a 

request for a deposition is approved, the 

convening authority shall detail a judge 

advocate certified under Art. 27(b) to serve as 

deposition officer. When the appointment of 

a judge advocate as deposition officer is not 

practicable, the convening authority may 

detail an impartial commissioned officer or 

appropriate civil officer authorized to 

administer oaths, not the accuser, to serve as 

deposition officer. If the deposition officer is 

not a judge advocate, an impartial judge 

advocate certified under Art. 27(b) shall be 

made available to provide legal advice to the 

deposition officer.’’ 

c. Several comments recommended 

changes to the new proposed RCM 

1001A, indicating that victims should 

have the right to testify under oath or 

allocute in an unsworn statement. The 

JSC adopted these proposals in part as 

follows: 

—A new rule, R.C.M. 1001A, is 

inserted to read as follows: 

‘‘Rule 1001A. Crime victims and 

presentencing 

(a) In general. A crime victim of an offense 

of which the accused has been found guilty 

has the right to be reasonably heard at a 

sentencing hearing relating to that offense. A 

victim under this rule is not considered a 

witness for purposes of Article 42(b). Trial 

counsel shall ensure the victim is aware of 

the opportunity to exercise that right. If the 

victim exercises the right to be reasonably 

heard, the victim shall be called by the court. 

This right is independent of whether the 

victim testified during findings or is called to 

testify under R.C.M. 1001. 

(b) Definitions. 

(1) Crime victim. For purposes of this rule, 

a ‘‘crime victim’’ is an individual who has 

suffered direct physical, emotional, or 

pecuniary harm as a result of the commission 

of an offense of which the accused was found 

guilty. 

(2) Victim Impact. For the purposes of this 

rule ‘‘victim impact’’ includes any financial, 

social, psychological, or medical impact on 

the victim directly relating to or arising from 

the offense of which the accused has been 

found guilty. 

(3) Mitigation. For the purposes of this rule 

‘‘mitigation’’ includes a matter to lessen the 

punishment to be adjudged by the courtmartial or to furnish grounds for a 

recommendation of clemency. 

(4) Right to be reasonably heard. 

(A) Capital cases. In capital cases, for 

purposes of this rule the ‘‘right to be 

reasonably heard’’ means the right to make a 

sworn statement. 

(B) Non-capital cases. In non-capital cases, 

for purposes of this rule the ‘‘right to be 

reasonably heard’’ means the right to make a 

sworn or unsworn statement. 

(c) Content of statement. The content of 

statements made under subsections (d) and 

(e) of this rule may include victim impact or 

matters in mitigation. 

(d) Sworn statement. The victim may give 

a sworn statement under this rule and shall 

be subject to cross-examination concerning it 

by the trial counsel or defense counsel or 

examination on it by the court-martial, or all 

or any of the three. When a victim is under 

18 years of age, incompetent, incapacitated, 

or deceased, the sworn statement may be 

made by the victim’s designee appointed 

under R.C.M. 801(a)(6). Additionally, a 

victim under 18 years of age may elect to 

make a sworn statement. 

(e) Unsworn statement. The victim may 

make an unsworn statement and may not be 

cross-examined by the trial counsel or 

defense counsel upon it or examined upon it 

by the court-martial. The prosecution or 

defense may, however, rebut any statements 

of facts therein. The unsworn statement may 

be oral, written, or both. When a victim is 

under 18 years of age, incompetent, 

incapacitated, or deceased, the unsworn 

statement may be made by the victim’s 

designee appointed under R.C.M. 801(a)(6). 

Additionally, a victim under 18 years of age 

may elect to make an unsworn statement. 

(1) Procedure for presenting unsworn 

statement. After the announcement of 

findings, a victim who would like to present 

an unsworn statement shall provide a copy 

to the trial counsel, defense counsel, and 

military judge. The military judge may waive 

this requirement for good cause shown. 

(2) Upon good cause shown, the military 

judge may permit the victim’s counsel to 

deliver all or part of the victim’s unsworn 

statement. 

d. The JSC has proposed an 

amendment to MRE 404(2)(A) to 

implement Section 536 of the FY15 

NDAA as follows: 

—Mil. R. Evid. 404(a)(2)(A) is 

amended to read as follows: 

‘‘(A) The accused may offer evidence of the 

accused’s pertinent trait, and if the evidence 

is admitted, the prosecution may offer 

evidence to rebut it. General military 

character is not a pertinent trait for the 

purposes of showing the probability of 

innocence of the accused for the following 

offenses under the UCMJ: 

(i) Articles 120–123a; 

(ii) Articles 125–127; 

(iii) Articles 129–132; 

(iv) Any other offense in which evidence 

of general military character of the accused 

is not relevant to any element of an offense 

for which the accused has been charged; or 

(v) An attempt or conspiracy to commit 

one of the above offenses.’’ 

e. Several comments recommended 

changes to MREs 412, 513, and 514. 

Several comments recommended 

modifying MRE 513(e)(2) to allow for a 

patient’s counsel to motion the military 

judge for a closed hearing. Several 

comments recommended deleting 

language stating that the opportunity to 

attend and be heard at MRE 513 

hearings is ‘‘at the patient’s own 

expense.’’ The JSC has adopted these 

proposals in part and proposed 

additional amendments to MREs 412, 

513, and 514 to implement Sections 534 

and 537 of the FY15 NDAA as follows: 

—Mil. R. Evid. 412(c)(2) is amended 

to read as follows: 

‘‘(2) Before admitting evidence under this 

rule, the military judge must conduct a 

hearing, which shall be closed. At this 

hearing, the parties may call witnesses, 

including the alleged victim, and offer 

relevant evidence. The alleged victim must 

be afforded a reasonable opportunity to 

attend and be heard. However, the hearing 

may not be unduly delayed for this purpose. 

The right to be heard under this rule includes 

the right to be heard through counsel, 

including victims’ counsel under section 

1044e of title 10, United States Code. In a 

case before a court-martial comprised of a 

military judge and members, the military 

judge shall conduct the hearing outside the 

presence of the members pursuant to Article 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 4, 2015 / Notices 6059 

39(a). The motion, related papers, and the 

record of the hearing must be sealed in 

accordance with R.C.M. 1103A and remain 

under seal unless the military judge or an 

appellate court orders otherwise.’’ 

—Mil. R. Evid. 513(b)(2) is amended 

to read as follows: 

‘‘(2) ‘‘Psychotherapist’’ means a 

psychiatrist, clinical psychologist, clinical 

social worker, or other mental health 

professional who is licensed in any State, 

territory, possession, the District of Columbia 

or Puerto Rico to perform professional 

services as such, or who holds credentials to 

provide such services as such, or who holds 

credentials to provide such services from any 

military health care facility, or is a person 

reasonably believed by the patient to have 

such license or credentials.’’ 

—Mil. R. Evid. 513(d)(8) is deleted. 

—Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(2) is amended 

to read as follows: 

‘‘(2) Before ordering the production or 

admission of evidence of a patient’s records 

or communication, the military judge must 

conduct a hearing, which shall be closed. At 

the hearing, the parties may call witnesses, 

including the patient, and offer other relevant 

evidence. The patient must be afforded a 

reasonable opportunity to attend the hearing 

and be heard. However, the hearing may not 

be unduly delayed for this purpose. The right 

to be heard under this rule includes the right 

to be heard through counsel, including 

victims’ counsel under section 1044e of title 

10, United States Code. In a case before a 

court-martial comprised of a military judge 

and members, the military judge must 

conduct the hearing outside the presence of 

the members.’’ 

—Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(3) is amended 

to read as follows: 

‘‘(3) The military judge may examine the 

evidence or a proffer thereof in camera, if 

such examination is necessary to rule on the 

production or admissibility of protected 

records or communications. Prior to 

conducting an in camera review, the military 

judge must find by a preponderance of the 

evidence that the moving party: 

(A) showed a specific factual basis 

demonstrating a reasonable likelihood that 

the records or communications would yield 

evidence admissible under an exception to 

the privilege; 

(B) that the requested information meets 

one of the enumerated exceptions under 

subsection (d) of this rule; 

(C) that the information sought is not 

merely cumulative of other information 

available; and 

(D) that the party made reasonable efforts 

to obtain the same or substantially similar 

information through non-privileged sources.’’ 

—Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(4) is inserted 

following Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(3) to read 

as follows: 

‘‘(4) Any production or disclosure 

permitted by the military judge under this 

rule must be narrowly tailored to only the 

specific records or communications, or 

portions of such records or communications, 

that meet the requirements for one of the 

enumerated exceptions to the privilege under 

subsection (d) above and are included in the 

stated purpose for which the records or 

communications are sought under subsection 

(e)(1)(A) above.’’ 

—Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(4) is 

renumbered as Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(5). 

—Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(5) is 

renumbered as Mil. R. Evid. 513(e)(6). 

—The title of Mil. R. Evid. 514 is 

amended to read as follows: 

‘‘Victim advocate-victim and Department 

of Defense Safe Helpline staff-victim 

privilege.’’ 

—Mil. R. Evid. 514(a) is amended to 

read as follows: 

‘‘(a) General Rule. A victim has a privilege 

to refuse to disclose and to prevent any other 

person from disclosing a confidential 

communication made between the alleged 

victim and a victim advocate or between the 

alleged victim and Department of Defense 

Safe Helpline staff, in a case arising under 

the UCMJ, if such communication was made 

for the purpose of facilitating advice or 

assistance to the alleged victim.’’ 

—Mil. R. Evid. 514(b)(3)–(5) is 

amended to read as follows 

‘‘(3) ‘‘Department of Defense Safe Helpline 

staff’’ is a person who is designated by 

competent authority in writing as 

Department of Defense Safe Helpline staff. 

(4) A communication is ‘‘confidential’’ if 

made in the course of the victim advocatevictim relationship or Department of Defense 

Safe Helpline staff-victim relationship and 

not intended to be disclosed to third persons 

other than those to whom disclosure is made 

in furtherance of the rendition of advice or 

assistance to the alleged victim or those 

reasonably necessary for such transmission of 

the communication. 

(5) ‘‘Evidence of a victim’s records or 

communications’’ means testimony of a 

victim advocate or Department of Defense 

Safe Helpline staff, or records that pertain to 

communications by a victim to a victim 

advocate or Department of Defense Safe 

Helpline staff, for the purposes of advising or 

providing assistance to the victim.’’ 

—Mil. R. Evid. 514(c) is amended to 

read as follows: 

‘‘(c) Who May Claim the Privilege. The 

privilege may be claimed by the victim or the 

guardian or conservator of the victim. A 

person who may claim the privilege may 

authorize trial counsel or a counsel 

representing the victim to claim the privilege 

on his or her behalf. The victim advocate or 

Department of Defense Safe Helpline staff 

who received the communication may claim 

the privilege on behalf of the victim. The 

authority of such a victim advocate, 

Department of Defense Safe Helpline staff, 

guardian, conservator, or a counsel 

representing the victim to so assert the 

privilege is presumed in the absence of 

evidence to the contrary.’’ 

—Mil. R. Evid. 514(d)(2)–(4) is 

amended to read as follows: 

‘‘(2) When federal law, state law, 

Department of Defense regulation, or service 

regulation imposes a duty to report 

information contained in a communication; 

(3) When a victim advocate or Department 

of Defense Safe Helpline staff believes that a 

victim’s mental or emotional condition 

makes the victim a danger to any person, 

including the victim; 

(4) If the communication clearly 

contemplated the future commission of a 

fraud or crime, or if the services of the victim 

advocate or Department of Defense Safe 

Helpline staff are sought or obtained to 

enable or aid anyone to commit or plan to 

commit what the victim knew or reasonably 

should have known to be a crime or fraud;’’ 

—Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(2) is amended 

to read as follows: 

‘‘(2) Before ordering the production or 

admission of evidence of a victim’s records 

or communication, the military judge must 

conduct a hearing, which shall be closed. At 

the hearing, the parties may call witnesses, 

including the victim, and offer other relevant 

evidence. The victim must be afforded a 

reasonable opportunity to attend the hearing 

and be heard. However, the hearing may not 

be unduly delayed for this purpose. The right 

to be heard under this rule includes the right 

to be heard through counsel, including 

victims’ counsel under section 1044e of title 

10, United States Code. In a case before a 

court-martial composed of a military judge 

and members, the military judge must 

conduct the hearing outside the presence of 

the members.’’ 

—Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(3) is amended 

to read as follows: 

‘‘(3) The military judge may examine the 

evidence or a proffer thereof in camera, if 

such examination is necessary to rule on the 

production or admissibility of protected 

records or communications. Prior to 

conducting an in camera review, the military 

judge must find by a preponderance of the 

evidence that the moving party: 

(A) showed a specific factual basis 

demonstrating a reasonable likelihood that 

the records or communications would yield 

evidence admissible under an exception to 

the privilege; 

(B) that the requested information meets 

one of the enumerated exceptions under 

subsection (d) of this rule; 

(C) that the information sought is not 

merely cumulative of other information 

available; and 

(D) that the party made reasonable efforts 

to obtain the same or substantially similar 

information through non-privileged sources.’’ 

—Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(4) is inserted 

following Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(3) to read 

as follows: 

‘‘(4) Any production or disclosure 

permitted by the military judge under this 

rule must be narrowly tailored to only the 

specific records or communications, or 

portions of such records or communications, 

that meet the requirements for one of the 

enumerated exceptions to the privilege under 

subsection (d) above and are included in the 

stated purpose for which the records or 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

6060 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 4, 2015 / Notices 

communications are sought under subsection 

(e)(1)(A) above.’’ 

—Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(4) is 

renumbered as Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(5). 

—Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(5) is 

renumbered as Mil. R. Evid. 514(e)(6). 

f. Comments making typographical 

corrections were received and those 

corrections were made. 

g. Comments were received suggesting 

additional amendments to RCM 104, 

105, 404A, RCM 405, 801 1103A and 

MREs 412 and 513. These suggested 

changes were not incorporated. Several 

suggested changes to the MCM as well 

as recommended legislative changes to 

UCMJ articles were not contemplated in 

the proposals currently under review. 

Those suggestions will be considered in 

the course of the 2015 annual review of 

the MCM, which is required by DoD 

Directive 5500.17. 

Dated: January 30, 2015. 

Aaron Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2015–02149 Filed 2–3–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

[Docket ID: DoD–2015–HA–0012] 

Privacy Act of 1974; System of 

Records 

AGENCY: Defense Health Agency, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice to alter a System of 

Records. 

SUMMARY: The Defense Health Agency is 

proposing to alter an existing system of 

records, EDHA 23, entitled ‘‘Pharmacy 

Data Transaction Service (PDTS)’’, in its 

inventory of record systems subject to 

the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended. 

This system is used to establish a 

central repository for coordinating 

benefits pertaining to prescriptions 

dispensed and/or filled at military 

treatment facilities, via TRICARE mailorder, the TRICARE retail pharmacy 

network, and privately owned 

pharmacies. 

DATES: Comments will be accepted on or 

before March 6, 2015. This proposed 

action will be effective the date 

following the end of the comment 

period unless comments are received 

which result in a contrary 

determination. 

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: Ms. 

Linda S. Thomas, Chief, Defense Health 

Agency Privacy and Civil Liberties 

Office, 7700 Arlington Boulevard, Suite 

5101, Falls Church, VA 22042–5101, or 

by phone at (703) 681–7500. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Defense Health Agency 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 in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT or at the Defense Privacy and 

Civil Liberties Division Web site at 

http://dpcld.defense.gov/. The proposed 

system report, as required by 5 U.S.C. 

552a(r) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as 

amended, was submitted on January 7, 

2015, to the House Committee on 

Oversight and 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 

February 8, 1996 (February 20, 1996, 61 

FR 6427). 

Dated: January 30, 2015. 

Aaron Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

EDHA 23 

SYSTEM NAME: 

Pharmacy Data Transaction Service 

(PDTS) (November 18, 2013, 78 FR 

69076) 

Changes 

* * * * * 

CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE

SYSTEM: 

Delete entry and replace with 

‘‘Members of the Uniformed Services 

(and their dependents), retired military 

members (and their dependents), 

contractors participating in military 

deployments or related operations, DoD 

civilian employees including nonappropriated fund employees, and other 

individuals who receive or have 

received drug prescriptions dispensed 

and/or filled at military treatment 

facilities, via TRICARE mail-order, the 

TRICARE retail pharmacy network, and 

commercial pharmacies.’’ 

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: 

Delete entry and replace with 

‘‘Electronic data extracted from an 

individual’s pharmacy and prescription 

records. 

Patient Data: Name, Social Security 

Number (SSN) and/or DoD 

Identification (ID) Number (or foreign ID 

number), visit date, date of birth, 

mailing address, home telephone 

number, family member prefix (if 

appropriate) or dependent suffix, 

gender, and relationship to policy 

holder. 

Sponsor Data: Name, SSN and/or DoD 

ID Number, date of birth, gender, 

insurance policy holder name, and data 

on Health Care Delivery Program Plan 

coverage. 

Other Data: Prescription data 

elements for dispensing: National Drug 

Code (NDC), quantity prescribed, days 

supply, number of refills authorized, 

prescribing physician’s National 

Provider Index (NPI) or Drug 

Enforcement Administration (DEA) 

number. 

ePrescribing: NDC, quantity 

prescribed, days supply, number of 

refills authorized, prescribing 

physician’s NPI or DEA number, text 

drug name, directions for use/

administration, prescribing physician 

(name, practice name, address, phone).’’ 

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: 

Delete entry and replace with ‘‘10 

U.S.C. Chapter 55, Medical and Dental 

Care; 32 CFR part 199, Civilian Health 

and Medical Program of the Uniformed 

Services (CHAMPUS); DoD Instruction 

6015.23, Delivery of Healthcare at 

Military Treatment Facilities: Foreign 

Service Care; Third Party Collection; 

Beneficiary Counseling and Assistance 

Coordinators (BCACs); and E.O. 9397 

(SSN), as amended.’’ 

PURPOSE(S): 

Delete entry and replace with ‘‘To 

establish a central repository for 

coordinating benefits pertaining to 

prescriptions dispensed and/or filled at 

military treatment facilities, via 

TRICARE mail-order, the TRICARE 

retail pharmacy network, and privately 

owned pharmacies. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES