28774 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 91 / Wednesday, May 11, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

■ 5. Supplement no. 5 to part 746 is 

amended by adding a sentence to the 

end of the introductory text to read as 

follows: 

Supplement No. 5 to Part 746—‘Luxury 

Goods’ That Require a License For 

Export, Reexport, and Transfer (InCountry) to or Within Russia or Belarus 

Pursuant to § 746.10(a)(1) and (2) 

* * * Schedule B number 

8412294000 is listed in both this 

supplement and supplement no. 4 to 

this part, so exporters, reexporters, and 

transferors must comply with the 

license requirements under both 

§§ 746.5(a)(ii) and 746.10 as applicable. 

* * * * * 

Thea D. Rozman Kendler, 

Assistant Secretary for Export 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2022–10099 Filed 5–9–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

32 CFR Part 310 

[Docket ID: DoD–2021–OS–0004] 

RIN 0790–AL20 

Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of 

Defense (OSD), Department of Defense 

(DoD). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense 

(Department or DoD) is issuing a final 

rule to amend its regulations to exempt 

portions of the system of records titled 

DoD–0006, ‘‘Military Justice and 

Civilian Criminal Case Records,’’ from 

certain provisions of the Privacy Act of 

1974. 

DATES: This rule is effective on June 10, 

2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Rahwa Keleta, Privacy and Civil 

Liberties Division, Directorate for 

Privacy, Civil Liberties and Freedom of 

Information, Office of the Assistant to 

the Secretary of Defense for Privacy, 

Civil Liberties, and Transparency, 

Department of Defense, 4800 Mark 

Center Drive, Mailbox #24, Suite 08D09, 

Alexandria, VA 22350–1700; 

OSD.DPCLTD@mail.mil; (703) 571– 

0070. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion of Comments and Changes 

The proposed rule published in the 

Federal Register on May 25, 2021 (86 

FR 28047–28049). Comments were 

accepted for 60 days until July 26, 2021. 

A total of one comment regarding the 

proposed rule was received. Please see 

a summary of the comment and the 

Department’s response as follows: 

DoD received one substantive 

comment on the notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM). The substantive 

comment on the NPRM objected to the 

exemptions as undermining the goal of 

ensuring records are kept and preserved 

for access at any time. The Privacy Act 

(5 U.S.C. 552a) generally provides that 

any person has a right (enforceable in 

court) of access to federal agency 

records about themselves that are 

maintained in a system of records, 

except to the extent that the information 

is protected from disclosure by one of 

ten exemptions. Exempting a system of 

records does not cause information to be 

destroyed or deleted but allows the 

agency to withhold records from firstparty access for particular reasons as 

articulated by the exemption rule. 

Records, even those with applicable 

exemption rules, are retained in 

accordance with the requirements of the 

Federal Records Act and records 

schedules approved by the National 

Archives and Records Administration. 

Having considered the public comment, 

the Department will implement the 

rulemaking as proposed. 

Background 

In finalizing this rule, DoD will 

exempt portions of the system of records 

titled, DoD–0006, ‘‘Military Justice and 

Civilian Criminal Case Records,’’ from 

certain provisions of the Privacy Act. 

This system of records describes DoD’s 

collection, use, and maintenance of 

records for the handling of Uniform 

Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and 

disciplinary cases within the authority 

of the DoD. This system of records also 

includes records created when DoD 

legal practitioners, in support of the 

U.S. Department of Justice, prosecute in 

U.S. District Courts crimes that occurred 

on military installations or property. 

Individuals covered by this system of 

records include armed forces members 

and others identified in Article 2 of the 

UCMJ, as well as civilians who are 

alleged to have engaged in criminal acts 

on DoD installations and properties. 

The purpose of this system of records 

is to support the collection, 

maintenance, use, and sharing of 

records compiled by the DoD for the 

adjudication and litigation of cases 

conducted under the UCMJ, as well as 

criminal proceedings brought in U.S. 

District Courts for offenses occurring on 

DoD installations or property. This 

system contains information, records, 

and filings publicly accessible on the 

Department’s court docket. It also 

supports the compilation of internal 

statistics and reports related to these 

activities. The collection and 

maintenance of this information by the 

DoD is necessary to meet its statutory 

obligations and ensure good order and 

discipline. 

The DoD is amending 32 CFR part 310 

to add a new Privacy Act exemption 

rule for DoD–0006, ‘‘Military Justice and 

Civilian Criminal Case Records.’’ Some 

of the records that are part of this 

system of records may contain classified 

national security information, and the 

disclosure of those records to an 

individual may cause damage to 

national security. The Privacy Act, 

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

authorizes agencies to claim an 

exemption for systems of records that 

contain information properly classified 

pursuant to executive order. The DoD is 

claiming an exemption from several 

provisions of the Privacy Act, including 

various access, amendment, disclosure 

of accounting, and certain recordkeeping and notice requirements 

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

prevent disclosure of any information 

properly classified pursuant to 

executive order, as implemented by DoD 

Instruction 5200.01 and DoD Manual 

5200.01, Volumes 1 and 3. 

The DoD also is exempting this 

system of records because these records 

support the conduct of criminal law 

enforcement activities, and certain 

requirements of the Privacy Act may 

interfere with the effective execution of 

these activities, and undermine good 

order and discipline. The Privacy Act, 

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

authorizes agencies with a principal law 

enforcement function pertaining to the 

enforcement of criminal laws (including 

activities of prosecutors, courts, etc.) to 

claim an exemption for systems of 

records that contain information 

identifying criminal offenders and 

alleged offenders, information compiled 

for the purpose of criminal 

investigation, or reports compiled 

during criminal law enforcement 

proceedings. Additionally, the Privacy 

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

authorizes agencies to compile 

investigatory material for law 

enforcement purposes, other than 

materials within the scope of 5 U.S.C. 

552a(j)(2). The DoD is claiming 

exemptions from several provisions of 

the Privacy Act, including various 

access, amendment, disclosure of 

accounting, and certain record-keeping 

and notice requirements, pursuant to 5 

U.S.C. 552a(j)(2) and 552a(k)(2), to 

prevent the harms articulated in this 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 91 / Wednesday, May 11, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 28775 

rule from occurring. In addition, records 

in this system of records are only 

exempt from the Privacy Act to the 

extent the purposes underlying the 

exemption pertain to the record. 

A notice establishing this system of 

records was published in the Federal 

Register on May 25, 2021 (86 FR 28086– 

28090). This system of records went into 

effect on May 25, 2021; however, 

comments on the Routine Uses were 

accepted through June 24, 2021. At the 

end of the comment period, one nonsubstantive comment was received. The 

Routine Uses went into effect at the 

close of the comment period. 

Regulatory Analysis 

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ and Executive 

Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory Review’’ 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

direct agencies to assess all costs and 

benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distribute impacts, and equity). 

Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the 

importance of quantifying both costs 

and benefits, of reducing costs, of 

harmonizing rules, and of promoting 

flexibility. It has been determined that 

this rule is not a significant regulatory 

action. 

Congressional Review Act 

This rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory 

Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6) 

The Assistant to the Secretary of 

Defense for Privacy, Civil Liberties, and 

Transparency certified that this rule 

does not have significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities because it is concerned only 

with the administration of a Privacy Act 

system of records within the DoD. 

Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork 

Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) 

It has been determined that this rule 

does not impose 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 this rule 

does 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 it will not 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’ 

It has been determined that this rule 

does not have federalism implications. 

This rule does 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. 

Executive Order 13175, ‘‘Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments’’ 

Executive Order 13175 establishes 

certain requirements that an agency 

must meet when it promulgates a 

proposed rule (and subsequent final 

rule) that imposes substantial direct 

compliance costs on one or more Indian 

tribes, preempts tribal law, or effects the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. This rule 

will not have a substantial effect on 

Indian tribal governments. 

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 310 

Privacy. 

Accordingly, 32 CFR part 310 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 310—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR 

part 310 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a. 

■ 2. Section 310.13 is amended by 

adding paragraph (e)(5) to read as 

follows: 

§ 310.13 Exemptions for DoD-wide 

systems. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(5) System identifier and name. DoD– 

0006, ‘‘Military Justice and Civilian 

Criminal Case Records.’’ 

(i) Exemptions. This system of records 

is exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and 

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

(e)(3); (e)(4)(G), (H), and (I); (e)(5); (e)(8); 

(f); and (g) of the Privacy Act to the 

extent the records are subject to 

exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

552a(j)(2). This system of records is 

exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3); (d)(1), 

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

(I); and (f) of the Privacy Act to the 

extent the records are subject to 

exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

552a(k)(1) and (k)(2). 

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

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

(iii) Exemption from the particular 

subsections. Exemption from the 

particular subsections is justified for the 

following reasons: 

(A) Subsection (c)(3), (d)(1), and 

(d)(2)—(1) Exemption (j)(2). Records in 

this system of records may contain 

investigatory material compiled for 

criminal law enforcement purposes to 

include information identifying 

criminal offenders and alleged 

offenders, information compiled for the 

purpose of criminal investigation, or 

reports compiled during criminal law 

enforcement proceedings. Application 

of exemption (j)(2) may be necessary 

because access to, amendment of, or 

release of the accounting of disclosures 

of such records could inform the record 

subject of an investigation of the 

existence, nature, or scope of an actual 

or potential law enforcement or 

disciplinary investigation, and thereby 

seriously impede law enforcement or 

prosecutorial efforts by permitting the 

record subject and other persons to 

whom he might disclose the records to 

avoid criminal penalties or disciplinary 

measures; reveal confidential sources 

who might not have otherwise come 

forward to assist in an investigation and 

thereby hinder DoD’s ability to obtain 

information from future confidential 

sources and result in an unwarranted 

invasion of the privacy of others. 

(2) Exemption (k)(1). Records in this 

system of records may contain 

information that is properly classified 

pursuant to executive order. 

Application of exemption (k)(1) may be 

necessary because access to and 

amendment of the records, or release of 

the accounting of disclosures for such 

records, could reveal classified 

information. Disclosure of classified 

records to an individual may cause 

damage to national security. 

(3) Exemption (k)(2). Records in this 

system of records may contain 

investigatory material compiled for law 

enforcement purposes other than 

material within the scope of 5 U.S.C. 

552a(j)(2). Application of exemption 

(k)(2) may be necessary because access 

to, amendment of, or release of the 

accounting of disclosures of such 

records could inform the record subject 

of an investigation of the existence, 

nature, or scope of an actual or potential 

law enforcement or disciplinary 

investigation, and thereby seriously 

impede law enforcement or 

prosecutorial efforts by permitting the 

record subject and other persons to 

whom he might disclose the records or 

the accounting of records to avoid 

criminal penalties, civil remedies, or 

disciplinary measures; interfere with a 

civil or administrative action or 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
28776 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 91 / Wednesday, May 11, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

investigation which may impede those 

actions or investigations; reveal 

confidential sources who might not 

have otherwise come forward to assist 

in an investigation and thereby hinder 

DoD’s ability to obtain information from 

future confidential sources; and result 

in an unwarranted invasion of the 

privacy of others. 

(B) Subsection (c)(4), (d)(3) and (4). 

These subsections are inapplicable to 

the extent that an exemption is being 

claimed from subsections (d)(1) and (2). 

(C) Subsection (e)(1). In the collection 

of information for investigatory or law 

enforcement purposes, it is not always 

possible to conclusively determine the 

relevance and necessity of particular 

information in the early stages of the 

investigation or adjudication. In some 

instances, it will be only after the 

collected information is evaluated in 

light of other information that its 

relevance and necessity for effective 

investigation and adjudication can be 

assessed. Collection of such information 

permits more informed decision-making 

by the Department when making 

required disciplinary and prosecutorial 

determinations. Additionally, records 

within this system may be properly 

classified pursuant to executive order. 

Accordingly, application of exemptions 

(j)(2), (k)(1) and (k)(2) may be necessary. 

(D) Subsection (e)(2). To collect 

information from the subject individual 

could serve notice that he or she is the 

subject of a criminal investigation and 

thereby present a serious impediment to 

such investigations. Collection of 

information only from the individual 

accused of criminal activity or 

misconduct could also subvert 

discovery of relevant evidence and 

subvert the course of justice. 

Accordingly, application of exemption 

(j)(2) may be necessary. 

(E) Subsection (e)(3). To inform 

individuals as required by this 

subsection could reveal the existence of 

a criminal investigation and 

compromise investigative efforts. 

Accordingly, application of exemption 

(j)(2) may be necessary. 

(F) Subsections (e)(4)(G) and (H). 

These subsections are inapplicable to 

the extent an exemption is claimed from 

subsections (d)(1) and (2). 

(G) Subsection (e)(4)(I). To the extent 

that this provision is construed to 

require more detailed disclosure than 

the broad, generic information currently 

published in the system notice, an 

exemption from this provision is 

necessary to protect the confidentiality 

of sources of information and to protect 

the privacy and physical safety of 

witnesses and informants. Accordingly, 

application of exemptions (j)(2), (k)(1), 

and (k)(2) may be necessary. 

(H) Subsection (e)(5). It is often 

impossible to determine in advance if 

investigatory records contained in this 

system are accurate, relevant, timely 

and complete, but, in the interests of 

effective law enforcement, it is 

necessary to retain this information to 

maintain an accurate record of the 

investigatory activity to preserve the 

integrity of the investigation and satisfy 

various Constitutional and evidentiary 

requirements, such as mandatory 

disclosure of potentially exculpatory 

information in the investigative file to a 

defendant. It is also necessary to retain 

this information to aid in establishing 

patterns of activity and provide 

investigative leads. With the passage of 

time, seemingly irrelevant or untimely 

information may acquire new 

significance as further investigation 

brings new details to light and the 

accuracy of such information can only 

be determined through judicial 

processes. Accordingly, application of 

exemption (j)(2) may be necessary. 

(I) Subsection (e)(8). To serve notice 

could give persons sufficient warning to 

evade investigative efforts. Accordingly, 

application of exemption (j)(2) may be 

necessary. 

(J) Subsection (f). The agency’s rules 

are inapplicable to those portions of the 

system that are exempt. Accordingly, 

application of exemptions (j)(2), (k)(1), 

and (k)(2) may be necessary. 

(K) Subsection (g). This subsection is 

inapplicable to the extent that the 

system is exempt from other specific 

subsections of the Privacy Act. 

(iv) Exempt records from other 

systems. In the course of carrying out 

the overall purpose for this system, 

exempt records from other systems of 

records may in turn become part of the 

records maintained in this system. To 

the extent that copies of exempt records 

from those other systems of records are 

maintained in this system, the DoD 

claims the same exemptions for the 

records from those other systems that 

are entered into this system, as claimed 

for the prior system(s) of which they are 

a part, provided the reason for the 

exemption remains valid and necessary. 

* * * * * 

Dated: May 6, 2022. 

Aaron T. Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2022–10127 Filed 5–10–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2022–0330] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; Potomac River, Between 

Charles County, MD, and King George 

County, VA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS). 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary safety zone for 

certain waters of the Potomac River. 

This action is necessary to provide for 

the safety of persons, and the marine 

environment from the potential safety 

hazards associated with construction 

operations at the new Governor Harry 

W. Nice/Senator Thomas ‘‘Mac’’ 

Middleton Memorial (US–301) Bridge, 

which will occur from May 16, 2022, 

through June 18, 2022. This rule will 

prohibit persons and vessels from being 

in the safety zone unless authorized by 

the Captain of the Port, MarylandNational Capital Region or a designated 

representative. 

DATES: This rule is effective from 7 a.m. 

on May 16, 2022, through 8 p.m. on 

June 18, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: To view documents 

mentioned in this preamble as being 

available in the docket, go to https://

www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2022– 

0330 in the search box and click 

‘‘Search.’’ Next, in the Document Type 

column, select ‘‘Supporting & Related 

Material.’’ 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

email Mr. Ron Houck, Sector MarylandNCR, Waterways Management Division, 

U.S. Coast Guard: telephone 410–576– 

2674, email Ronald.L.Houck@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

COTP Captain of the Port 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

§ Section 

TFR Temporary final rule 

U.S.C. United States Code 

II. Background Information and 

Regulatory History 

On April 21, 2022, Skanska-CormanMcLean, Joint Venture notified the 

Coast Guard that the company will be 

setting pier protection fender ring 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1