```

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 138 (Thursday, July 22, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38624-38627]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14987]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

28 CFR Part 16

[CPCLO Order No. 003-2021]

Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation

AGENCY: United States Department of Justice.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On July 14, 2021 in the publication of the Federal Register at 
86 FR 37188, the Department of Justice (Department or DOJ), has 
published a notice of a modified system of records that was retitled 
as, ``Department of Justice Information Technology, Information System, 
and Network Activity and Access Records,'' JUSTICE/DOJ-002. In this 
notice of proposed rulemaking, DOJ proposes to exempt this system of 
records from certain provisions of the Privacy Act in order to avoid 
interference with the efforts of DOJ and others to prevent the 
unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification, or 
destruction of DOJ information and information systems, and to protect 
information on DOJ classified networks. For the reasons provided below, 
the Department proposes to amend its Privacy Act regulations by 
establishing an exemption for records in this system from certain 
provisions of the Privacy Act. Public comment is invited.

DATES: Comments must be received by August 23, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     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 Standard 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 
Standard Time may want to consider this so that their electronic 
comments are received.
     Mail: United States Department of Justice, Office of 
Privacy and Civil Liberties, ATTN: Privacy Analyst, Office of Privacy 
and Civil Liberties, 145 N St. 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.
    Posting of Public Comments: Interested persons are invited to

[[Page 38625]]

participate in this rulemaking by submitting written data, views, or 
arguments on all aspects of this rule by one of the methods and by the 
deadline stated above. All comments must be submitted in English, or 
accompanied by an English translation. The Department also invites 
comments that relate to the economic, environmental, or federalism 
effects that might result from this rule. Comments that will provide 
the most assistance to the Department in developing these procedures 
will reference a specific portion of the rule, explain the reason for 
any recommended change, and include data, information, or authority 
that support such recommended change.
    Please note that all comments received are considered part of the 
public record and made available for public inspection at 
www.regulations.gov. Such information includes personally identifying 
information (PII) (such as your name, address, etc.). Interested 
persons are not required to submit their PII in order to comment on 
this rule. However, any PII that is submitted is subject to being 
posted to the publicly-accessible www.regulations.gov site without 
redaction.
    Confidential business information clearly identified in the first 
paragraph of the comment as such will not be placed in the public 
docket file.
    The Department may withhold from public viewing information 
provided in comments that they determine may impact the privacy of an 
individual or is offensive. For additional information, please read the 
Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of 
http://www.regulations.gov. To inspect the agency's public docket file 
in person, you must make an appointment with the agency. Please see the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph, below, for agency contact 
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nickolous Ward, DOJ Chief Information 
Security Officer, (202) 514-3101, 145 N Street NE, Washington, DC 
20530.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the Federal Information 
Security Modernization Act of 2014, among other authorities, DOJ is 
responsible for complying with information security policies and 
procedures requiring information security protections commensurate with 
the risk and magnitude of harm resulting from the unauthorized access, 
use, disclosure, disruption, modification, or destruction of DOJ 
information and information systems. See, e.g., 44 U.S.C. 3554 (2018). 
Consistent with these requirements, DOJ must ensure that it maintains 
accurate audit and activity records of the observable occurrences on 
its information systems and networks (also referred to as ``events'') 
that are significant and relevant to the security of DOJ information 
and information systems. These audit and activity records may include, 
but are not limited to, information that establishes what type of event 
occurred, when the event occurred, where the event occurred, the source 
of the event, the outcome of the event, and the identity of any 
individuals or subjects associated with the event. Additionally, 
monitored events--whether detected utilizing information systems 
maintaining audit and activity records, reported to the Department by 
information system users, or reported to the Department by the 
cybersecurity research community and members of the general public 
conducting good faith vulnerability discovery activities--may 
constitute occurrences that (1) actually or imminently jeopardize, 
without lawful authority, the integrity, confidentiality, or 
availability of information or an information system; or (2) constitute 
a violation or imminent threat of violation of law, security policies, 
security procedures, or acceptable use policies. The Department has 
developed a formal process to track and document these reported 
``incidents,'' which may, in limited circumstances, include records of 
individuals reporting, or otherwise associated with, an actual or 
suspected event or incident.
    The DOJ notice that published in the July 14, 2021 issue of the 
Federal Register, at 86 FR 37188 has proposed modifications to a 
Department-wide system of records retitled, ``Department of Justice 
Information Technology, Information System, and Network Activity and 
Access Records,'' JUSTICE/DOJ-002. This system covers the Department's 
tracking of all DOJ information technology, DOJ information system, and 
DOJ network activity and access by users. These records assist 
Department information security professionals in protecting DOJ 
information, ensuring the secure operation of DOJ information systems, 
and tracking and documenting incidents reported to the agency. The 
revisions to this notice reflect changes in technology, including the 
increased ability of the Department to link individuals to information 
technology, information system, or network activity, and to better 
describe the Department's records linking individuals to reported 
cybersecurity incidents or their access to certain information 
technologies, information systems, and networks through the internet or 
other authorized connections.
    In this rulemaking, the Department proposes to exempt JUSTICE/DOJ-
002 from certain provisions of the Privacy Act in order to avoid 
interference with the responsibilities of the Department to prevent the 
unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification, or 
destruction of DOJ information and information systems. Additionally, 
the Department proposes to exempt JUSTICE/DOJ-002 from certain 
provisions of the Privacy Act to protect activity and audit log records 
on DOJ classified networks.

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563--Regulatory Review

    In accordance with 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. This proposed rule will promulgate certain Privacy Act exemptions 
for a DOJ system of records titled, ``Department of Justice Information 
Technology, Information System, and Network Activity and Access 
Records,'' JUSTICE/DOJ-002. This proposed rule does not raise novel 
legal or policy issues, nor does it adversely affect the economy, the 
budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, loan programs, or 
the rights and obligations of recipients thereof in a material way. The 
Department of Justice has determined that this rule is not a 
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, section 
3(f), and accordingly this 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.

[[Page 38626]]

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 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 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

0
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

0
2. Add Sec.  16.138 to subpart E to read as follows:

Sec.  16.138  Exemption of the Department of Justice, Computer Systems 
Activity and Access Records, JUSTICE/DOJ-002.

    (a) The Department of Justice Information Technology, Information 
System, and Network Activity and Access Records (JUSTICE/DOJ-002) 
system of records is exempted from subsections (c)(3); (d); (e)(1), 
(e)(4)(G), (H), and (I); and (f) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as 
amended. These exemptions apply only to the extent that information in 
this system is subject to exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1) or 
(k)(2). The applicable exemption may be waived by the DOJ in its sole 
discretion where DOJ determines compliance with the exempted provisions 
of the Act would not interfere with or adversely affect the purpose of 
this system to ensure that the Department can track information system 
access and implement information security protections commensurate with 
the risk and magnitude of harm that could result from the unauthorized 
access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification, or destruction of 
DOJ information and DOJ information systems.
    (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 this system is 
exempt from the access provisions of subsection (d). Also, because 
making available to a record subject the accounting of disclosures of 
records concerning the subject would specifically reveal investigative 
interests in the records by the DOJ or other entities that are 
recipients of the disclosures. Revealing this information could 
compromise sensitive information classified in the interest of national 
security, or interfere with the overall law enforcement process by 
revealing a pending sensitive cybersecurity investigation. Revealing 
this information could also permit the record subject to obtain 
valuable insight concerning the information obtained during any 
investigation and to take measures to impede the investigation, e.g., 
destroy evidence or alter techniques to evade discovery.
    (2) From subsection (d)(1), (2), (3) and (4), (e)(4)(G) and (H), 
and (f) because these provisions concern individual access to and 
amendment of certain law enforcement and classified records, compliance 
of which could alert the subject of an authorized law enforcement 
activity about that particular activity and the interest of the DOJ 
and/or other law enforcement or intelligence agencies. Providing access 
could compromise information classified to protect national security, 
or reveal sensitive cybersecurity investigative techniques; provide 
information that would allow a subject to avoid detection; or 
constitute a potential danger to the health or safety of law 
enforcement personnel or confidential sources.
    (3) From subsection (e)(1) because it is not always possible to 
know in advance what information is relevant and necessary for law 
enforcement and intelligence purposes. The relevance and utility of 
certain information that may have a nexus to cybersecurity threats may 
not always be fully evident until and unless it is vetted and matched 
with other information necessarily and lawfully maintained by the DOJ 
or other entities.
    (4) From subsection (e)(4)(I), to the extent that this subsection 
is interpreted to require more detail regarding the record sources in 
this system than has

[[Page 38627]]

been published in the Federal Register. Should the subsection be so 
interpreted, exemption from this provision is necessary to protect the 
sources of law enforcement and intelligence information. Further, 
greater specificity of sources of properly classified records could 
compromise national security.

    Dated: July 1, 2021.
Peter A. Winn,
Acting Chief Privacy and Civil Liberties Officer, United States 
Department of Justice.
[FR Doc. 2021-14987 Filed 7-21-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-NW-P
```