Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 90 / Monday, May 11, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 25771

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 10, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Pamela A. Posch, Office of General

Counsel, 5550 Friendship Blvd., Chevy

Chase, MD 20815. Telephone: (301)

492–5959.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Commission has determined that cases

of confusion over whether a warrant

should be executed or placed as a

detainer (if the alleged parole violator is

already in custody on another charge)

can be readily avoided if the

Commission adopts a procedure

designed to expedite the receipt of

warrants by the U.S. Marshals Service.

Other possibilities for delay and

confusion prior to the receipt of a signed

warrant can also be avoided. The only

legal obligation under which the

Commission operates with respect to the

issuance of valid warrants is that a

warrant must be issued prior to the

expiration of the parolee’s sentence.

Issuance and delivery of a warrant are

separate events. 18 U.S.C. 4213(d)

(1976).

The term ‘‘issue’’ means to send out

officially. Hervey v. Secretary of Health

and Human Services, 88 F.3d 1001,

1002 (Fed. Cir. 1996). The long-accepted

definition of the term ‘‘issue’’ has never

been specific as to means of issuance.

Accordingly, the Parole Commission

may, by regulation, define the issuance

of a warrant as being the electronic

transmission of the signed warrant to

the arresting authorities. The date and

time of ‘‘issuance’’ of a warrant will be

the date and time it is transmitted

electronically. The signed original,

having been thus issued, will remain in

the Commission’s file.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory

Flexibility Statement

The U.S. Parole Commission has

determined that this rule is not a

significant regulatory action for the

purposes of Executive Order 12866, and

the rule has, accordingly, not been

reviewed by the Office of Management

and Budget. The rule will not have a

significant economic impact upon a

substantial number of small entities,

within the meaning of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, U.S.C. 605(b).

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 2

Administrative practice and

procedure, Prisoners, Probation and

parole.

The Final Rule

Accordingly, the U.S. Parole

Commission makes the following

changes to 28 CFR Part 2.

PART 2—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for 28 CFR

Part 2 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 18 U.S.C. 4203(a)(1) and

4204(a)(6).

2. 28 CFR Part 2, § 2.44 (c) is revised

to read as follows:

§ 2.44 Summons to appear or warrant for

retaking of parolee.

* * * * *

(c) A summons or warrant may be

issued only within the prisoner’s

maximum term or terms except that in

the case of a prisoner released as if on

parole pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4164, such

summons or warrant may be issued only

within the maximum term or terms, less

one hundred eighty days. A summons or

warrant shall be considered issued

when signed and either—

(1) Placed in the mail or

(2) Sent by electronic transmission to

the intended authorities.

* * * * *

Dated: May 5, 1998.

Michael J. Gaines,

Chairman, U.S. Parole Commission.

[FR Doc. 98–12387 Filed 5–8–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Parole Commission

28 CFR Part 2

Paroling, Recommitting, and

Supervising Federal Prisoners:

Release of Information to the Public

AGENCY: Parole Commission, Justice.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission’s regulation

concerning the disclosure of

information about offenders under its

jurisdiction currently addresses only

those situations where disclosure is

necessary to give notice to potential

victims of individuals on parole, or to

assist law enforcement authorities. No

provision is made for the general

disclosure of information about

prisoners and parolees when such

information is considered to be ‘‘public

sector’’ information that may be

disclosed without the consent of the

subject. At 28 CFR 540.65(b), the Bureau

of Prisons defines the information that

is considered ‘‘a matter of public

record’’ for disclosure to representatives

of the media. The Parole Commission is

now amending its regulation to define

the information that it gives to the

media and to the public generally.

EFFECTIVE DATE: Effective June 10, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Pamela A. Posch, Office of General

Counsel, 5550 Friendship Blvd., Chevy

Chase, Maryland 20815. Telephone:

(301) 492–5959.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

information defined as ‘‘public sector’’

information is consistent with the

information defined in § 540.65(b), and

with the current practice of the U.S.

Parole Commission. The same policy

will be followed for both U.S. and D.C.

Code offenders.

It should be noted that, although

Commission decisions may be

disclosed, this does not necessarily

include the statement of reasons

provided by the Commission in support

of each decision. Pursuant to its routine

use exemptions from the Privacy Act of

1974 (published at 53 FR 7813, March

10, 1988), public disclosure of the full

Notice of Action issued by the Parole

Commission is only available if the

Commission has determined that

disclosure is appropriate ‘‘* * * to

further understanding of the criminal

justice system by the public’’ and has

transmitted the Notice of Action to the

Office of Public Affairs of the

Department of Justice.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory

Flexibility Statement

The U.S. Parole Commission has

determined that this rule is not a

significant regulatory action for the

purposes of Executive Order 12866, and

the rule has, accordingly, not been

reviewed by the Office of Management

and Budget. The rule will not have a

significant economic impact upon a

substantial number of small entities,

within the meaning of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b).

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 2

Administrative practice and

procedure, Prisoners, Probation and

parole.

The Final Rule

Accordingly, the U.S. Parole

Commission makes the following

changes to 28 CFR Part 2:

PART 2—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for 28 CFR

Part 2 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 18 U.S.C. 4203(a)(1) and

4204(a)(6).

2. 28 CFR Part 2, § 2.37 is amended

by adding the following new paragraph

(c):

§ 2.37 Disclosure of information

concerning parolees; Statement of policy.

* * * * *
25772 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 90 / Monday, May 11, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

(c) Information deemed to be ‘‘public

sector’’ information may be disclosed to

third parties without the consent of the

file subject. Public sector information

encompasses the following:

(1) Name;

(2) Register number;

(3) Offense of conviction;

(4) Past and current places of

incarceration;

(5) Age;

(6) Sentence data on the Bureau of

Prisons sentence computation record

(BP–5);

(7) Date(s) of parole and parole

revocation hearings; and

(8) The decision(s) rendered by the

Commission following a parole or

parole revocation proceeding, including

the dates of continuances and parole

dates. An inmate’s designated future

place of incarceration is not public

information.

Dated: May 5, 1998.

Michael J. Gaines,

Chairman, U.S. Parole Commission.

[FR Doc. 98–12386 Filed 5–8–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Defense Logistics Agency

32 CFR Part 323

[Defense Logistics Agency Reg. 5400.21]

Privacy Act; Implementation

AGENCY: Defense Logistics Agency, DoD.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Defense Logistics Agency

is exempting a system of records

identified as S500.60 CA, entitled ‘DLA

Complaint Program Records’ from

certain provisions of the Privacy Act.

The exemptions are intended to increase

the value of the system of records for

law enforcement purposes, to comply

with prohibitions against the disclosure

of certain kinds of information, and to

protect the privacy of individuals

identified in the system of records.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 5, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the

Privacy Act Officer, Defense Logistics

Agency, ATTN: CAAR, 8725 John J.

Kingman Road, Suite 2533, Fort Belvoir,

VA 22060–6221.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Susan Salus at (703) 767–6183.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Order 12866. It has been

determined that this Privacy Act rule for

the Department of Defense does not

constitute ‘significant regulatory action’.

Analysis of the rule indicates that it

does not have an annual effect on the

economy of $100 million or more; does

not create a serious inconsistency or

otherwise interfere with an action taken

or planned by another agency; does not

materially alter the budgetary impact of

entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan

programs or the rights and obligations of

recipients thereof; does not raise novel

legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President’s priorities, or

the principles set forth in Executive

Order 12866.

Regulatory Flexibility Act. It has been

determined that this Privacy Act rule for

the Department of Defense does not

have significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

because it is concerned only with the

administration of Privacy Act systems of

records within the Department of

Defense.

Paperwork Reduction Act. It has been

determined that this Privacy Act rule for

the Department of Defense imposes 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, and 44 U.S.C. Chapter

35.

This rule adds an exempt Privacy Act

system of records to the DLA inventory

of systems of records. DLA operates a

complaint system whereby individuals

may report instances of suspected fraud,

waste, or abuse; mismanagement;

contract deviations, noncompliance, or

improprieties; administrative

misconduct; or adverse treatment under

the complaint program. Allegations are

investigated and appropriate corrections

are instituted. The exempt system

reflects recognition that certain records

in the system may be deemed to require

protection from disclosure in order to

protect confidential sources mentioned

in the files and avoid compromising,

impeding, or interfering with

investigative and enforcement

proceedings. The proposed rule was

previously published on March 6, 1998,

at 63 FR 11198. No comments were

received, therefore, the Director is

adopting the exemptions for the reasons

provided.

List of subjects in 32 CFR part 323

Privacy.

Accordingly, 32 CFR part 323 is

amended as follows:

Part 323 – Defense Logistics Agency

Privacy Program.

1. The authority citation for 32 CFR

Part 323 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat 1896 (5

U.S.C. 552a).

2. Appendix H to Part 323 is to be

amended by adding paragraph e. as

follows:

Appendix H to Part 323-DLA Exemption

Rules.

* * * * *

e. ID: S500.60 CA (Specific

exemption).

1. System name: DLA Complaint

Program Records.

2. Exemption: (i) Investigatory

material compiled for law enforcement

purposes may be exempt pursuant to 5

U.S.C. 552a(k)(2). However, if an

individual is denied any right, privilege,

or benefit for which he would otherwise

be entitled by Federal law or for which

he would otherwise be eligible, as a

result of the maintenance of the

information, the individual will be

provided access to the information

except to the extent that disclosure

would reveal the identity of a

confidential source.

(ii) Investigatory 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.

3. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) and

(k)(5), subsections (c)(3), (d)(1) through

(d)(4), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I), and

(f).

4. Reasons: (i) From subsection (c)(3)

because to grant access to an accounting

of disclosures as required by the Privacy

Act, including the date, nature, and

purpose of each disclosure and the

identity of the recipient, could alert the

subject to the existence of the

investigation or prosecutive interest by

DLA or other agencies. This could

seriously compromise case preparation

by prematurely revealing its existence

and nature; compromise or interfere

with witnesses or make witnesses

reluctant to cooperate; and lead to

suppression, alteration, or destruction of

evidence.

(ii) From subsections (d)(1) through

(d)(4), and (f) because providing access

to records of a civil or administrative

investigation and the right to contest the

contents of those records and force

changes to be made to the information

contained therein would seriously

interfere with and thwart the orderly

and unbiased conduct of the

investigation and impede case

preparation. Providing access rights

normally afforded under the Privacy Act

would provide the subject with valuable

information that would allow

interference with or compromise of

witnesses or render witnesses reluctant

to cooperate; lead to suppression,

alteration, or destruction of evidence;