Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 139 / Friday, July 23, 2021 / Proposed Rules 38955 

by submitting such written data, views, 

or arguments, as they may desire. 

Comments that provide the factual basis 

supporting the views and suggestions 

presented are particularly helpful in 

developing reasoned regulatory 

decisions on the proposal. Comments 

are specifically invited on the overall 

regulatory, aeronautical, economic, 

environmental, and energy-related 

aspects of the proposal. 

Communications should identify both 

docket numbers and be submitted in 

triplicate to the address listed above. 

Commenters wishing the FAA to 

acknowledge receipt of their comments 

on this notice must submit with those 

comments a self-addressed, stamped 

postcard on which the following 

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to 

Docket No. FAA–2021–0555/Airspace 

Docket No. 21–ACE–16.’’ The postcard 

will be date/time stamped and returned 

to the commenter. 

All communications received before 

the specified closing date for comments 

will be considered before taking action 

on the proposed rule. The proposal 

contained in this notice may be changed 

in light of the comments received. A 

report summarizing each substantive 

public contact with FAA personnel 

concerned with this rulemaking will be 

filed in the docket. 

Availability of NPRMs 

An electronic copy of this document 

may be downloaded through the 

internet at https://www.regulations.gov. 

Recently published rulemaking 

documents can also be accessed through 

the FAA’s web page at https://

www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ 

airspace_amendments/. 

You may review the public docket 

containing the proposal, any comments 

received, and any final disposition in 

person in the Dockets Office (see the 

ADDRESSES section for the address and 

phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and 

5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except federal holidays. An informal 

docket may also be examined during 

normal business hours at the Federal 

Aviation Administration, Air Traffic 

Organization, Central Service Center, 

Operations Support Group, 10101 

Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 

76177. 

Availability and Summary of 

Documents for Incorporation by 

Reference 

This document proposes to amend 

FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace 

Designations and Reporting Points, 

dated July 21, 2020, and effective 

September 15, 2020. FAA Order 

7400.11E is publicly available as listed 

in the ADDRESSES section of this 

document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists 

Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, 

air traffic service routes, and reporting 

points. 

The Proposal 

The FAA is proposing an amendment 

to 14 CFR part 71 by amending the Class 

E airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the at Salem Memorial 

Airport, Salem, MO, by removing the 

Maples VORTAC and associated 

extension from the airspace legal 

description. 

This action is necessary due to an 

airspace review caused by the 

decommissioning of the Maples VOR, 

which provided navigation information 

for the instrument procedures this 

airport, as part of the VOR MON 

Program. 

Class E airspace designations are 

published in paragraph 6005 of FAA 

Order 7400.11E, dated July 21, 2020, 

and effective September 15, 2020, which 

is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 

71.1. The Class E airspace designation 

listed in this document will be 

published subsequently in the Order. 

FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace 

Designations and Reporting Points, is 

published yearly and effective on 

September 15. 

Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

The FAA has determined that this 

regulation only involves an established 

body of technical regulations for which 

frequent and routine amendments are 

necessary to keep them operationally 

current, is non-controversial and 

unlikely to result in adverse or negative 

comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a 

‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 

FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) 

does not warrant preparation of a 

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated 

impact is so minimal. Since this is a 

routine matter that will only affect air 

traffic procedures and air navigation, it 

is certified that this rule, when 

promulgated, would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

Environmental Review 

This proposal will be subject to an 

environmental analysis in accordance 

with FAA Order 1050.1F, 

‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and 

Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final 

regulatory action. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, pursuant to the 

authority delegated to me, the Federal 

Aviation Administration proposes to 

amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR 

part 71 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 

40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 

1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

■ 2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11E, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated July 21, 2020, and 

effective September 15, 2020, is 

amended as follows: 

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas 

Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More 

Above the Surface of the Earth. 

* * * * * 

ACE MO E5 Salem, MO [Amended] 

Salem Memorial Airport, MO 

(Lat. 37°36′55′′ N, long. 91°36′16′′ W) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 6.3-mile 

radius of Salem Memorial Airport. 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 19, 

2021. 

Martin A. Skinner, 

Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, 

ATO Central Service Center. 

[FR Doc. 2021–15580 Filed 7–22–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

28 CFR Part 16 

[CPCLO Order No. 005–2020] 

Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation 

AGENCY: Office of Legal Policy, United 

States Department of Justice. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: On July 14, 2021, the Office 

of Legal Policy (OLP), a component 

within the United States Department of 

Justice (DOJ or Department), published 

in the Federal Register a notice of a 

modified system of records for the OLP 

system of records, Judicial Nominations 

Files, JUSTICE/OLP–002. In this notice 

of proposed rulemaking, OLP proposes 

to modify the exemptions from certain 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
38956 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 139 / Friday, July 23, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

provisions of the Privacy Act claimed 

for this system of records, as well as 

other administrative modifications. For 

the reasons provided below, the 

Department proposes to amend its 

Privacy Act regulations. Public 

comments are invited. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

August 23, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Email: privacy.compliance@

usdoj.gov. To ensure proper handling, 

please reference the CPCLO Order No. 

in the subject line of the message. 

• Fax: 202–307–0693. 

• Mail: United States Department of 

Justice, Office of Privacy and Civil 

Liberties, ATTN: Privacy Analyst, Two 

Constitution Square (2Con), 145 N 

Street NE, Suite 8W.300, Washington, 

DC 20530. All comments sent via 

regular or express mail will be 

considered timely if postmarked on the 

day the comment period closes. To 

ensure proper handling, please 

reference the CPCLO Order No. in your 

correspondence. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. When submitting 

comments electronically, you must 

include the CPCLO Order No. in the 

subject box. Please note that the 

Department is requesting that electronic 

comments be submitted before midnight 

Eastern Daylight Savings Time on the 

day the comment period closes because 

http://www.regulations.gov terminates 

the public’s ability to submit comments 

at that time. Commenters in time zones 

other than Eastern Time may want to 

consider this to ensure that their 

electronic comments are received. 

Posting of Public Comments: Please 

note that all comments received are 

considered part of the public record and 

made available for public inspection 

online at http://www.regulations.gov 

and in the Department’s public docket. 

Such information includes personally 

identifying information (such as your 

name, address, etc.) voluntarily 

submitted by the commenter. If you 

want to submit personally identifying 

information (such as your name, 

address, etc.) as part of your comment, 

but do not want it to be posted online 

or made available in the public docket, 

you must include the phrase 

‘‘PERSONALLY IDENTIFYING 

INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph 

of your comment. You must also place 

all personally identifying information 

that you do not want posted online or 

made available in the public docket in 

the first paragraph of your comment and 

identify what information you want 

redacted. 

If you want to submit confidential 

business information as part of your 

comment, but do not want it to be 

posted online or made available in the 

public docket, you must include the 

phrase ‘‘CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS 

INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph 

of your comment. You must also 

prominently identify confidential 

business information to be redacted 

within the comment. If a comment has 

so much confidential business 

information that it cannot be effectively 

redacted, all or part of that comment 

may not be posted online or made 

available in the public docket. 

Personally identifying information 

and confidential business information 

identified and located as set forth above 

will be redacted and the comment, in 

redacted form, may be posted online 

and placed in the Department’s public 

docket file. Please note that the Freedom 

of Information Act applies to all 

comments received. If you wish to 

inspect the agency’s public docket file 

in person by appointment, please see 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

paragraph, below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Matrina Matthews, Executive Officer, 

Office of Legal Policy, U.S. Department 

of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Room 4234, Washington, DC 

20530–0001; telephone: (202) 616–0040; 

email: matrina.matthews@usdoj.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Assistant Attorney General, OLP, is 

responsible for assisting the Attorney 

General in, inter alia, advising and 

assisting in the selection and 

appointment of Federal judges. OLP is 

comprised of attorneys and other DOJ 

personnel responsible for assisting the 

Assistant Attorney General in executing 

the responsibilities of the office. DOJ 

established the recently renamed system 

of records, ‘‘Judicial Nominations 

Files,’’ JUSTICE/OLP–002, to maintain 

records primarily needed to assist the 

Assistant Attorney General, OLP, and 

the personnel within OLP, in assessing 

candidates for potential nomination to 

be a Federal judge and securing a 

judicial nominee’s confirmation and 

appointment. 

OLP updated the system of records 

notice for JUSTICE/OLP–002, 86 FR 

37192 (July 14, 2021), to account for a 

number of organizational, procedural, 

and technological changes that have 

modernized the information and 

information system used to collect, 

maintain, and disseminate these 

records. The Department determined 

that these updates to the system of 

records notice were necessary to 

accurately describe the Department’s 

organizational, procedural, and 

technological changes. 

As part of the existing process for 

reviewing an individual’s potential 

nomination to a Federal judgeship or 

other related Executive Branch position, 

and securing confirmation, individuals 

agree to a number of evaluations, 

including but not limited to, a full 

background investigation. As disclosed 

in JUSTICE/OLP–002, OLP will 

maintain records relating to these 

investigations in its system of records. 

Given the law enforcement and national 

security information maintained in 

these records, as well as the 

examination materials used to assess a 

potential nominee, the Department has 

determined that it is appropriate to 

claim additional exemptions from 

certain Privacy Act provisions for these 

records. 

Specifically, certain classified 

information may be maintained in 

JUSTICE/OLP–002, including but not 

limited to, records related to a potential 

nominee that maintained a previous or 

current position with access to 

classified information and/or assigned 

to a national security sensitive position. 

Given the law enforcement information 

that may be discovered as part of the 

nomination investigation and/or 

evaluations, certain investigatory 

materials for law enforcement purposes 

may be maintained in this system of 

records. Investigatory material may also 

be used in determining suitability, 

eligibility, or qualification decisions, 

and such information may require 

exemption to the extent that the 

disclosure of such material would reveal 

the identity of a source who furnished 

information to the Department under an 

express promise that the identity of the 

source would be held in confidence. 

The Department also utilizes various 

examination materials to determine 

individual qualifications for 

appointment, which if disclosed, could 

compromise the objectivity or fairness 

of the Department’s examination and 

vetting process. 

Finally, as an administrative matter, 

the Department proposes to modify 28 

CFR 16.73 as a result of the rescindment 

of JUSTICE/OLP–001, ‘‘Freedom of 

Information and Privacy Appeals 

Index,’’ and JUSTICE/OLP–004, 

‘‘Declassification Review System.’’ See 

66 FR 29994 (June 6, 2001). Specifically, 

the administrative edits proposed in this 

rule would: (1) Remove the current 

paragraphs (g), and (h); and (2) revise 28 

CFR 16.73(a), (b), (c), and (d), to account 

for OLP’s two remaining systems of 

records that claim Privacy Act 

exemptions—JUSTICE/OLP–002 and the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 139 / Friday, July 23, 2021 / Proposed Rules 38957 

‘‘General Files System of the Office of 

Legal Policy,’’ JUSTICE/OLP–003. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563– 

Regulatory Review 

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

and 552a(k), this proposed action is 

subject to formal rulemaking procedures 

by giving interested persons an 

opportunity to participate in the 

rulemaking process ‘‘through 

submission of written data, views, or 

arguments,’’ pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553. 

The Department has determined that 

this proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866, section 3(f), and 

accordingly this proposed rule has not 

been reviewed by the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

within the Office of Management and 

Budget pursuant to Executive Order 

12866. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This proposed rule will only impact 

Privacy Act-protected records, which 

are personal and generally do not apply 

to an individual’s entrepreneurial 

capacity, subject to limited exceptions. 

Accordingly, the Chief Privacy and Civil 

Liberties Officer, in accordance with the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 

605(b)), has reviewed this regulation 

and by approving it certifies that this 

regulation will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Subtitle E– 

Congressional Review Act) 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., requires the 

Department to comply with small entity 

requests for information and advice 

about compliance with statutes and 

regulations within the Department’s 

jurisdiction. Any small entity that has a 

question regarding this document may 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

paragraph, above. Persons can obtain 

further information regarding SBREFA 

on the Small Business Administration’s 

web page at https://www.sba.gov/ 

advocacy. This proposed rule is not a 

major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804 of 

the Congressional Review Act. 

Executive Order 13132—Federalism 

This proposed rule will not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, in 

accordance with Executive Order 13132, 

it is determined that this proposed rule 

does not have sufficient federalism 

implications to warrant the preparation 

of a Federalism Assessment. 

Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice 

Reform 

This proposed regulation meets the 

applicable standards set forth in 

sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive 

Order 12988 to eliminate drafting errors 

and ambiguity, minimize litigation, 

provide a clear legal standard for 

affected conduct, and promote 

simplification and burden reduction. 

Executive Order 13175—Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This proposed rule will have no 

implications for Indian Tribal 

governments. More specifically, it does 

not have substantial direct effects on 

one or more Indian tribes, on the 

relationship between the Federal 

government and Indian tribes, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

government and Indian tribes. 

Therefore, the consultation 

requirements of Executive Order 13175 

do not apply. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

This proposed rule will not result in 

the expenditure by State, local and 

tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

by the private sector, of $100,000,000, as 

adjusted for inflation, or more in any 

one year, and it will not significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. 

Therefore, no actions were deemed 

necessary under the provisions of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), requires the 

Department to consider the impact of 

paperwork and other information 

collection burdens imposed on the 

public. There are no current or new 

information collection requirements 

associated with this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 16 

Administrative Practices and 

Procedures, Courts, Freedom of 

Information, and the Privacy Act. 

Pursuant to the authority vested in the 

Attorney General by 5 U.S.C. 552a and 

delegated to me by Attorney General 

Order 2940–2008, the Department of 

Justice proposes to amend 28 CFR part 

16 as follows: 

PART 16—PRODUCTION OR 

DISCLOSURE OF MATERIAL OR 

INFORMATION 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 16 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a, 553; 

28 U.S.C. 509, 510, 534; 31 U.S.C. 3717. 

Subpart E—Exemption of Records 

Systems Under the Privacy Act 

■ 2. Revise § 16.73 to read as follows: 

§ 16.73 Exemption of Office of Legal Policy 

Systems. 

(a) The Judicial Nominations Files 

(JUSTICE/OLP–002) system of records is 

exempt from subsections (c)(3); (d); 

(e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I); and (f) of 

the Privacy Act, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

552a(k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(5), and (k)(6). 

These exemptions apply only to the 

extent that information in this system of 

records is subject to an exemption, 

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

compliance would not appear to 

interfere with or adversely affect OLP’s 

processes, OLP may waive the 

applicable exemption. 

(b) Exemptions from the particular 

subsections are justified for the 

following reasons: 

(1) From subsection (c)(3), the 

requirement that an accounting be made 

available to the named subject of a 

record, because release of disclosure 

accountings could alert the subject of an 

investigation and/or evaluation to the 

extent of an investigation and/or 

evaluation. Such a disclosure could also 

reveal investigative interests by not only 

OLP, but also other recipient agencies or 

components. Since release of such 

information to the subjects of an 

investigation would provide them with 

significant information concerning the 

nature of the investigation and/or 

evaluation, release could result in the 

destruction of documentary evidence, 

improper influencing of witnesses, 

endangerment of the physical safety of 

confidential sources, witnesses, and law 

enforcement personnel, the fabrication 

of testimony, and other activities that 

could impede or compromise the 

investigation and/or evaluation. In 

addition, providing the individual an 

accounting for each disclosure could 

result in the release of properly 

classified information which would 

compromise the national defense or 

disrupt foreign policy. 

(2) From subsection (d), the access 

and amendment provisions, because 

many persons are contacted who, 

without an assurance of anonymity, 

refuse to provide information 

concerning the subject of an 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
38958 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 139 / Friday, July 23, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

investigation and/or evaluation. Access 

could reveal the identity of the source 

of the information and constitute a 

breach of the promised confidentiality 

on the part of the Department. Such 

breaches ultimately would restrict the 

free flow of information vital to the 

determination of a candidate’s 

qualifications and suitability, among 

other determinations. The Department 

also relies on certain examination 

materials to assess and evaluate an 

individual’s qualifications for an 

applicable position. Access and/or 

amendment to such material could 

reveal information about the 

examination and vetting process and 

could compromise its objectivity and/or 

fairness. Access and/or amendment to 

such material could also inappropriately 

advantage future candidates with 

knowledge of the examination materials. 

Finally, providing the individual access 

or amendment rights could result in the 

release of properly classified 

information which would compromise 

the national defense or disrupt foreign 

policy. 

(3) From subsection (e)(1), because in 

the collection of information for 

investigative and evaluative purposes, it 

is impossible to determine in advance 

what exact information may be of 

assistance in determining the 

qualifications and suitability of the 

subject of an investigation and/or 

evaluation. Information which may 

seem irrelevant, when combined with 

other seemingly irrelevant information, 

can on occasion provide a composite 

picture of a candidate which assists in 

determining whether that candidate 

should be nominated for appointment. 

Relevance and necessity are questions of 

judgment and timing, and it is only after 

the information is evaluated that the 

relevance and necessity of such 

information can be established. In 

interviewing individuals or obtaining 

other forms of information during OLP 

processes, information may be supplied 

to OLP which relates to matters 

incidental to the primary purpose of 

OLP’s processes, but also relates to 

matters under the investigative 

jurisdiction of another agency. Such 

information cannot readily be 

segregated. 

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

and subsection (f), because this system 

is exempt from the access and 

amendment provisions of subsection 

(d). 

(c) The General Files System of the 

Office of Legal Policy (JUSTICE/OLP– 

003) system of records is exempt from 

subsections 552a(c)(3) and (4); (d); 

(e)(1), (2) and (3), (e)(4)(G) and (H), and 

(e)(5); and (g) of the Privacy Act, 

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), (k)(1), 

(k)(2) and (k)(5). These exemptions 

apply only to the extent that 

information in this system is subject to 

exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(j), 

(k). Where compliance would not 

appear to interfere with or adversely 

affect OLP’s processes, the applicable 

exemption may be waived by OLP. 

(d) Exemptions from the particular 

subsections are justified for the 

following reasons: 

(1) From subsection (c)(3) because 

making available to a record subject the 

accounting of disclosures from records 

concerning him/her would reveal 

investigative interest on the part of the 

Department as well as the recipient 

agency. This would permit record 

subjects to impede the investigation, 

e.g., destroy evidence, intimidate 

potential witnesses, or flee the area to 

avoid inquiries or apprehension by law 

enforcement personnel. 

(2) From subsection (c)(4) because this 

system is exempt from the access 

provisions of subsection (d) pursuant to 

subsections (j) and (k) of the Privacy 

Act. 

(3) From subsection (d) because the 

records contained in this system relate 

to official Federal investigations. 

Individual access to these records might 

compromise ongoing investigations, 

reveal confidential informants, or 

constitute unwarranted invasions of the 

personal privacy of third parties who 

are involved in a certain investigation. 

Amendment of records would interfere 

with ongoing criminal law enforcement 

proceedings and impose an impossible 

administrative burden by requiring 

criminal investigations to be 

continuously reinvestigated. 

(4) From subsections (e)(1) and (5) 

because in the course of law 

enforcement investigations, information 

may occasionally be obtained or 

introduced, the accuracy of which is 

unclear or which is not strictly relevant 

or necessary to a specific investigation. 

In the interests of effective law 

enforcement, it is appropriate to retain 

all information since it may aid in 

establishing patterns of criminal 

activity. Moreover, it would impede the 

specific investigation process if it were 

necessary to assure the relevance, 

accuracy, timeliness and completeness 

of all information obtained. 

(5) From subsections (e)(2) because in 

a law enforcement investigation the 

requirement that information be 

collected to the greatest extent possible 

from the subject individual would 

present a serious impediment to law 

enforcement in that the subject of the 

investigation would be informed of the 

existence of the investigation and would 

therefore be able to avoid detection, 

apprehension, or legal obligations and 

duties. 

(6) From subsection (e)(3) because to 

comply with the requirements of this 

subsection during the course of an 

investigation could impede the 

information gathering process, thus 

hampering the investigation. 

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

because this system is exempt from the 

access provisions of subsection (d) 

pursuant to subsections (j) and (k) of the 

Privacy Act. 

(8) From subsection (g) because this 

system is exempt from the access and 

amendment provisions of subsection (d) 

pursuant to subsections (j) and (k) of the 

Privacy Act. 

Dated: July 1, 2021. 

Peter A. Winn, 

Acting Chief Privacy and Civil Liberties 

Officer, United States Department of Justice. 

[FR Doc. 2021–14995 Filed 7–22–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–CW–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Part 1 

RIN 2900–AR20 

Threshold for Reporting VA Debts to 

Consumer Reporting Agencies 

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its 

regulations around the conditions by 

which VA benefits debts or medical 

debts are reported to consumer 

reporting agencies (CRA). The Johnny 

Isakson and David P. Roe, M.D. Veterans 

Health Care and Benefits Improvement 

Act of 2020 provides the Secretary 

authority to prescribe regulations that 

establish the minimum amount of a 

benefits or medical debt that the 

Secretary will report to the CRA. This 

proposed change will establish the 

methodology for determining a 

minimum threshold for debts reported 

to CRA. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 21, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be 

submitted through www.regulations.gov 

or mailed to Debt Management Center, 

Office of Management, 189, 1 Federal 

Drive, Suite 4500, Fort Snelling, MN 

55111. Comments should indicate that 

they are submitted in response to ‘‘RIN 

2900–AR20—Threshold for Reporting 

VA Debts to Consumer Reporting 

Agencies. Comments received will be 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS