Unknown. Final rule

7,747 words·~35 min read·/register/2007/07/16/07-3441

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

--- schema: federal-register doc_type: fedreg source_file: FR-2007-07-16.xml --- 72 135 Monday, July 16, 2007 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See Forest Service See Natural Resources Conservation Service Centers Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 38837 E7-13730 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Ports and waterways safety; regulated navigation areas, safety zones, security zones, etc.:

Lake Michigan, MI, 38785-38787 E7-13732 Regattas and marine parades: SBIP - Fountain Powerboats Kilo Run and Super Boat Grand Prix, 38783-38785 E7-13715 PROPOSED RULES Ports and waterways safety; regulated navigation areas, safety zones, security zones, etc.: Choptank River, MD, 38804-38806 E7-13706 Regattas and marine parades: Clarksville Hydroplane Challenge, 38808-38810 E7-13725 Poquoson Seafood Festival Workboat Races, 38806-38808 E7-13724 NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 38839-38840 E7-13731 Commerce Commerce Department See Economic Development Administration See Industry and Security Bureau See International Trade Administration See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Comptroller Comptroller of the Currency RULES Depository Institution Management Interlocks Act; implementation, 38753-38755 07-3441 Defense Defense Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 38826 07-3451 Privacy Act; systems of records, 38826-38827 E7-13710 Economic Economic Development Administration NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.:

National Technical Assistance, Training, Research, and Evaluation Program, 38812-38815 E7-13586 Education Education Department NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Postsecondary education— Hurricane Education Recovery Awards, 38827-38831 E7-13728 Energy Energy Department See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission EPA Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air pollutants, hazardous; national emission standards: Acrylic and modacrylic fibers production, carbon black production, lead acid battery manufacturing, wood preserving, etc., 38864-38917 E7-12018 Air quality implementation plans:

Preparation, adoption, and submittal— Plan submission methods and public hearing requirements; revisions and administrative changes, 38787-38793 E7-13716 Air quality implementation plans; approval and promulgation; various States: Virginia, 38920-38949 E7-13545 PROPOSED RULES Air programs: Volatile organic compound emission standards, national— Aerosol coatings, 38952-38991 E7-13108 Executive Executive Office of the President See Presidential Documents See Trade Representative, Office of United States FAA Federal Aviation Administration RULES Standard instrument approach procedures, 38755-38757 E7-13224 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness directives:

Bell Helicopter Textron Canada, 38797-38800 07-3434 PIAGGIO AERO INDUSTRIES, 38800-38802 E7-13713 NOTICES Aircraft: Zeppelin Luftschifftechnik GmbH model LZ N07 airship; design criteria availability; requests for comments, 38858 E7-13707 Meetings: RTCA, INC., 38858-38860 07-3443 07-3444 FCC Federal Communications Commission RULES Common carrier services: Wireless telecommunications services— Advanced Mobile Phone Services; Provide analog service to subscribers and roamers, 38793-38794 E7-13727 FDIC Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation RULES Depository Institution Management Interlocks Act; implementation, 38753-38755 07-3441 NOTICES Meetings;

Sunshine Act, 38831 E7-13726 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency NOTICES Disaster and emergency areas: Kansas, 38840 E7-13704 New York, 38840-38841 E7-13705 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission RULES Electric utilities (Federal Power Act): Business practice standards and communication protocols for public utilities, 38757-38767 E7-13591 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Environmental statements; notice of intent: Albany County, NY, 38860 07-3461 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System RULES Depository Institution Management Interlocks Act; implementation, 38753-38755 07-3441 FTC Federal Trade Commission NOTICES Premerger notification waiting periods; early terminations, 38831-38836 07-3435 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES Incidental take permits:

Charlotte County, FL, 38843 E7-13711 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Meetings: Olympic Peninsula Resource Advisory Committee, 38812 07-3458 Health Health and Human Services Department See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention See Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Scientific misconduct findings; administrative actions: Roovers, Kristin, Ph.D., 38836-38837 E7-13703 Homeland Homeland Security Department See Coast Guard See Federal Emergency Management Agency See U.S.

Citizenship and Immigration Services RULES Immigration: United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Technology Program (US-VISIT)— Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT); exemptions from Privacy Act systems of records provisions; implementation, 38749-38750 E7-13576 Privacy Act; implementation, 38750-38753 E7-13564 Industry Industry and Security Bureau NOTICES Meetings: Deemed Export Advisory Committee, 38815-38816 07-3452 Interior Interior Department See Fish and Wildlife Service See Land Management Bureau See National Park Service IRS Internal Revenue Service RULES Income taxes:

Qualified zone academy bonds; obligations of States and political subdivisions, 38767-38778 E7-13665 PROPOSED RULES Income taxes: Qualified zone academy bonds; obligations of States and political subdivisions; cross reference, 38802-38803 E7-13663 International International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping: Steel nails from— China and United Arab Emirates, 38816-38823 E7-13721 Antidumping and countervailing duties: New pneumatic off-the-road tires from— China, 38816 E7-13719 Trade mission:

Renewable Energy Alternative Fuels; mission statement, 38823-38824 07-3463 Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Meetings: Resource Advisory Councils— Western Montana, 38843-38844 07-3450 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Meetings: Ignition interlocks for convicted impaired driving offenders, 38860-38861 E7-13729 National Labor National Labor Relations Board RULES Privacy Act; implementation, 38778-38783 E7-13684 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fishery conservation and management:

Alaska; fisheries of Exclusive Economic Zone— Pacific ocean perch, 07-3432 38794-38796 07-3455 Pacific ocean perch and Rougheye rockfish, 38795-38796 07-3457 NOTICES Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.: Cordell Marine Sanctuary Advisory Board, 38825 07-3456 Marine mammal permit applications, determinations, etc., 38825-38826 E7-13736 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 38844 07-3448 Concession contract negotiatioons:

Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve, CO; sale of firewood, 38844 07-3449 NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NOTICES Environmental statements; records of decision: Lost River Subwatershed of the Potomac River Watershed, WV, 38812 E7-13744 Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.: Medical Uses of Isotopes Advisory Committee; nominations, 38844-38845 E7-13723 Regulatory guides; issuance, availability, and withdrawal, 38845-38846 E7-13742 Office of U.S.

Trade Office of United States Trade Representative See Trade Representative, Office of United States Peace Peace Corps NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 38847-38849 07-3436 07-3437 07-3438 07-3439 07-3440 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration PROPOSED RULES Hazardous materials: Conversion of special permits into regulations of general applicability, 38810-38811 E7-13579 Presidential Presidential Documents PROCLAMATIONS *Special observances:* Parents’ Day (Proc. 8161), 38993-38996 07-3485 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Women's Justice and Empowerment Initiative; transfer of funds (Presidential Determination) No. 2007-25 of July 5, 2007, 38747 07-3473 SEC Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes:

Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 38850-38853 E7-13694 E7-13696 Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc., 38853-38858 E7-13695 Substance Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 38837-38839 E7-13714 Thrift Thrift Supervision Office RULES Depository Institution Management Interlocks Act; implementation, 38753-38755 07-3441 Trade Trade Representative, Office of United States NOTICES World Trade Organization:

General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS)— U.S. Service Commitments Schedule; compensatory adjustment negotiations, 38846-38847 E7-13734 Transportation Transportation Department See Federal Aviation Administration See Federal Highway Administration See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration See Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Treasury Treasury Department See Comptroller of the Currency See Internal Revenue Service See Thrift Supervision Office NOTICES Bonds, Treasury: 10-3/8 percent bonds (2007-2012); call for redemption, 38861 07-3422 Meetings:

Debt Management Advisory Committee, 38861-38862 07-3453 MISSING FOR: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Agency information collection activities; proposals, submissions, and approvals, 38841-38842 E7-13697 E7-13698 E7-13699 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Environmental Protection Agency, 38864-38917 E7-12018 Part III Environmental Protection Agency, 38920-38949 E7-13545 Part IV Environmental Protection Agency, 38952-38991 E7-13108 Part V Executive Office of the President, Presidential Document, 38993-38996 07-3485 Reader Aids Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, and notice of recently enacted public laws.

To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 72 135 Monday, July 16, 2007 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Office of the Secretary 6 CFR Part 5 [Docket No. DHS-2007-0044] Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation of Exemptions AGENCY: Privacy Office, Office of the Secretary, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: On July 27, 2006 the Department of Homeland Security published a notice of proposed rulemaking to exempt portions of the Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT) system of records from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act because of criminal, civil, and administrative enforcement requirements. No comments were received so this final rule adopts the proposed rule of July 27, 2006, without change. DATES: This final rule is effective August 15, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Claire Miller, Acting US-VISIT Privacy Officer, Washington, DC 20528, by telephone

(202)298-5200, or by facsimile

(202)298-5201. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On July 27, 2006 the Department of Homeland Security published a notice of proposed rulemaking to exempt portions of the Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT) system of records notice from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act because of criminal, civil, and administrative enforcement requirements. This proposed rule would exempt certain records from the access and amendment provisions of law as permitted by the Privacy Act. No comments were received in response to this notice of proposed rulemaking, so this final rule adopts the proposed rule of July 27, 2006, without change. IDENT is the primary repository of biometric information held by DHS in connection with its several and varied missions and functions, including, but not limited to: The enforcement of civil and criminal laws (including the immigration law); investigations, inquiries, and proceedings thereunder; and national security and intelligence activities. IDENT is a centralized and dynamic DHS-wide biometric database that also contains limited biographic, unique identifiers, and encounter history information needed to place the biometric information in proper context. The information is collected by, on behalf of, in support of, or in cooperation with DHS and its components and may contain personally identifiable information collected by other Federal, State, local, tribal, foreign, or international government agencies. The Privacy Act requires each agency to publish in the **Federal Register** a description of the type and character of each system of records that the agency maintains, and the routine uses that are contained in each system in order to make agency recordkeeping practices transparent, to notify individuals regarding the uses to which personally identifiable information is put, and to assist individuals in finding such files within the agency. The Privacy Act allows Government agencies to exempt certain records from the access and amendment provisions. If an agency claims an exemption, however, it must issue a rulemaking to make clear to the public the reasons why a particular exemption is claimed. By this rule DHS is claiming exemption from certain requirements of the Privacy Act for IDENT. Some information in IDENT relates to official DHS national security, immigration and border management, and law enforcement activities. These exemptions are needed to protect information relating to DHS activities from disclosure to subjects or others related to these activities. Specifically, the exemptions are required to preclude subjects of these activities from frustrating these processes; to avoid disclosure of activity techniques; to protect the identities and physical safety of confidential informants and of immigration and border management and law enforcement personnel; to ensure DHS's ability to obtain information from third parties and other sources; to protect the privacy of third parties; and to safeguard classified information. Disclosure of information to the subject of the inquiry could also permit the subject to avoid detection or apprehension. The exemptions are standard law enforcement and national security exemptions exercised by a large number of Federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies. In appropriate circumstances, where compliance would not appear to interfere with or adversely affect the law enforcement purposes of this system and the overall law enforcement process, the applicable exemptions may be waived. List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5 Privacy, Freedom of information. For the reasons stated in the preamble, DHS amends Chapter I of Title 6, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: PART 5—DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS AND INFORMATION 1. The authority citation for part 5 continues to read as follows: Authority: Pub. L. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135, 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; 5 U.S.C. 301. Subpart A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552. Subpart B also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a. 2. Amend Appendix C to part 5 by adding a new section 4 to read as follows: Appendix C—DHS Systems of Records Exempt From the Privacy Act 4. The Department of Homeland Security Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT) consists of electronic and paper records and will be used by DHS and its components. IDENT is the primary repository of biometric information held by DHS in connection with its several and varied missions and functions, including, but not limited to: The enforcement of civil and criminal laws (including the immigration law); investigations, inquiries, and proceedings thereunder; and national security and intelligence activities. IDENT is a centralized and dynamic DHS-wide biometric database that also contains limited biographic and encounter history information needed to place the biometric information in proper context. The information is collected by, on behalf of, in support of, or in cooperation with DHS and its components and may contain personally identifiable information collected by other Federal, State, local, tribal, foreign, or international government agencies. Pursuant to exemptions 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2) of the Privacy Act, portions of this system are exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (4); (d); (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(5) and (e)(8); (f)(2) through (5); and (g). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), this system is exempt from the following provisions of the Privacy Act, subject to the limitations set forth in those subsections: 5 U.S.C. 552a (c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), and (e)(4)(H). Exemptions from these particular subsections are justified, on a case-by-case basis to be determined at the time a request is made, for the following reasons:

(a)From subsection (c)(3) and

(4)(Accounting for Disclosures) because release of the accounting of disclosures could alert the subject of an investigation of an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation to the existence of the investigation; and reveal investigative interest on the part of DHS as well as the recipient agency. Disclosure of the accounting would therefore present a serious impediment to law enforcement efforts and/or efforts to preserve national security. Disclosure of the accounting would also permit the individual who is the subject of a record to impede the investigation, to tamper with witnesses or evidence, and to avoid detection or apprehension, which would undermine the entire investigative process.

(b)From subsection

(d)(Access to Records) because access to the records contained in this system of records could inform the subject of an investigation of an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation, to the existence of the investigation, and reveal investigative interest on the part of DHS or another agency. Access to the records could permit the individual who is the subject of a record to impede the investigation, to tamper with witnesses or evidence, and to avoid detection or apprehension. Amendment of the records could interfere with ongoing investigations and law enforcement activities and would impose an impossible administrative burden by requiring investigations to be continuously reinvestigated. In addition, permitting access and amendment to such information could disclose security-sensitive information that could be detrimental to homeland security.

(c)From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and Necessity of Information) because in the course of investigations into potential violations of Federal law, the accuracy of information obtained or introduced occasionally may be unclear or the information may not be strictly relevant or necessary to a specific investigation. In the interests of effective law enforcement, it is appropriate to retain all information that may aid in establishing patterns of unlawful activity.

(d)From subsection (e)(2) (Collection of Information from Individuals) because requiring that information be collected from the subject of an investigation would alert the subject to the nature or existence of an investigation, thereby interfering with the related investigation and law enforcement activities.

(e)From subsection (e)(3) (Notice to Subjects) because providing such detailed information would impede law enforcement in that it could compromise the existence of a confidential investigation or reveal the identity of witnesses or confidential informants.

(f)From subsections (e)(4)(G) and

(H)(Agency Requirements), and (f)(2 through 5) (Agency Rules) because portions of this system are exempt from the individual access provisions of subsection

(d)and thereby would not require DHS to establish requirements or rules for records which are exempted from access.

(g)From subsection (e)(5) (Collection of Information) because in the collection of information for law enforcement purposes it is impossible to determine in advance what information is accurate, relevant, timely, and complete. Compliance with (e)(5) would preclude DHS agents from using their investigative training and exercise of good judgment to both conduct and report on investigations.

(h)From subsection (e)(8) (Notice on Individuals) because compliance would interfere with DHS' ability to obtain, serve, and issue subpoenas, warrants, and other law enforcement mechanisms that may be filed under seal, and could result in disclosure of investigative techniques, procedures, and evidence.

(i)From subsection

(g)to the extent that the system is exempt from other specific subsections of the Privacy Act. Dated: July 5, 2007. Hugo Teufel III, Chief Privacy Officer. [FR Doc. E7-13576 Filed 7-13-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-10-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Office of the Secretary 6 CFR Part 5 [Docket Number DHS-2007-0047] Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of Exemptions; Redress and Response Records System AGENCY: Privacy Office, Office of the Secretary, DHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Security is issuing a final rule to amend its regulations to exempt portions of a new system of records entitled the Redress and Response Records System from certain provisions of the Privacy Act. Specifically, the Department proposes to exempt portions of the Redress and Response Records System from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act because of criminal, civil, and administrative enforcement requirements. DATES: *Effective Date:* This final rule is effective July 16, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hugo Teufel III, Chief Privacy Officer, Privacy Office, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528; telephone 703-235-0780; facsimile: 866-466-5370. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On January 18, 2007, DHS published notice of a new Privacy Act system of records entitled “Redress and Response Records System, DHS/ALL-005.” 1 The DHS Redress and Response Records System maintains records for the DHS Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (TRIP), which is the traveler redress mechanism established by DHS in connection with the Rice-Chertoff Initiative, as well as in accordance with other policy and law. DHS TRIP will facilitate the public's ability to provide appropriate information to DHS for redress requests when they believe they have been denied entry, refused boarding for transportation, or identified for additional screening by DHS components or programs at their operational locations. Such locations include airports, seaports, train stations, and land borders. DHS TRIP will create a cohesive process to address these redress requests across DHS. 1 72 FR 2296 (January 18, 2007). DHS TRIP will serve as a mechanism to share redress-related information and facilitate communication of redress results across DHS components. It will also facilitate efficient adjudication of redress requests. Once the information intake is complete, DHS TRIP will facilitate the transfer of or access to this information for the DHS components or other agencies that will address the redress request. This system contains records pertaining to various categories of individuals, including: Individuals seeking redress or individuals on whose behalf redress is sought from DHS; individuals applying for redress on behalf of another individual; and DHS employees and contractors assigned to interact with the redress process. No exemption shall be asserted with respect to information submitted by and collected from individuals or their representatives in the course of any redress process associated with this System of Records. In conjunction with publication of the DHS Redress and Response Records System system of records notice, DHS initiated a rulemaking to exempt this system of records from a number of provisions of the Privacy Act, 2 because this system may contain records or information recompiled from or created from information contained in other systems of records, which are exempt from certain provisions of the Privacy Act. For these records or information only, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(5), DHS will also claim the original exemptions for these records or information from subsections (c)(3) and (4); (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4); (e)(1), (2), (3), (4)(G) through (I), (5), and (8); (f), and

(g)of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, as necessary and appropriate to protect such information. Such exempt records or information may be law enforcement or national security investigation records, law enforcement activity and encounter records, or terrorist screening records. 2 72 FR 2209 (January 18, 2007). Public Comments DHS received four comments on the proposed rule and two on the DHS Redress and Response Records System system of records notice. With regard to the comments received on the proposed rule, two of the four comments received via the docket did not address this particular proposed rule and appear to be mistaken submissions. One comment received did not specifically provide comments, but posed a number of questions. The remaining comment provided observations with regard to the DHS Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (DHS TRIP) and watchlists, and comments regarding the system of records notice and the proposed rule. With regard to the two comments received on the system of records notice, one comment was a duplicate of the last noted comment on the proposed rule. The remaining comment was a general comment regarding the DHS TRIP program and did not address issues concerning the system or records notice or the proposed rule. A discussion for response to the applicable comments received is below. The comments received questioned the use of exemptions to provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974 as proposed. Generally, DHS proposed to use the exemptions in order to protect information relating to law enforcement investigations from disclosure to subjects of investigations and others who could interfere with investigatory and law enforcement activities. Specifically, the exemptions are required to: Preclude subjects of investigations from frustrating the investigative process; avoid disclosure of investigative techniques; protect the identities and physical safety of confidential informants and of law enforcement personnel; ensure DHS's and other federal agencies' ability to obtain information from third parties and other sources; protect the privacy of third parties; and safeguard sensitive information. Nevertheless, under the proposed rule, these exemptions will only be claimed for information coming into this system of records from systems that already claim exemptions on such information, and no exemptions would be claimed over information collected directly from an individual for input into this system of records. In fact, both the system of records notice and the proposed rule indicate that as part of the process for responding to requests, if information about an individual contained in this system of records comes from a system claiming exemptions, a review will occur to determine if the need to claim exemption from provisions of the Privacy Act with regard to a particular individual's information continues to be necessary. This approach to claiming exemptions will not only provide better access to information and directly resolve the concerns raised in the comments received, but it will also serve to enhance the redress process by ensuring the accuracy and relevancy of information in underlying systems of records. One comment suggested that this provision is meaningless; however, due to the appropriate routine uses included in the system of records notice, because the routine uses regarding the sharing of information for law enforcement or counter-intelligence/counter-terrorism purposes work independently of whether or not information is disclosed back to the individual and therefore is not meaningless. As noted above, DHS seeks only to protect information from inappropriate disclosure that originates from systems already claiming exemptions; however, on a case-by-case basis, DHS will examine whether or not the exemptions continue to be necessary with regard to the particular individual's information. Additionally, one comment suggests that the exemptions are unnecessary because, in the context of the information potentially held in this system of records, an individual will “know” that he or she is under investigation and therefore the underlying reason for needing the exemptions is moot; however, an individual's mere belief that his or her perceived delay or inconvenience while traveling does not provide that individual with definitive knowledge of whether or not he or she was the subject of an investigation, even if that individual already sought resolution through the DHS TRIP. The comments received questioned the general need for exempting some records of this system from the provisions of the Privacy Act. Because information in this system of records may be related to investigations that may arise out of DHS programs and activities, such information may pertain to national security and/or law enforcement matters. In such cases, allowing access to such information could alert subjects of such investigations of actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violations, and could reveal, in an untimely manner, DHS's and other agencies' investigative interests in law enforcement efforts to preserve national security. Additionally, DHS needs to have the ability to claim these exemptions in order to protect information relating to investigations from disclosure to subjects of investigations and others who could interfere with investigatory activities. Specifically, the exemptions are required to: Withhold information to the extent it identifies witnesses promised confidentiality as a condition of providing information during the course of an investigation; prevent subjects of investigations from frustrating the investigative process; avoid disclosure of investigative techniques; protect the privacy of third parties; ensure DHS' and other federal agencies' ability to obtain information from third parties and other sources; and safeguard sensitive information. The exemptions proposed here are standard law enforcement and national security exemptions exercised by federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies. One comment asserts that this rule will create new exemptions for other systems of records. Nonetheless, this rule cannot exempt other existing systems of records from provisions of the Privacy Act. The purpose of this rule is to protect appropriately information coming into this system of records from systems that independently claim exemptions. Further, the comment indicates that there is no “alternative venue” for individuals regarding their information; however, the DHS TRIP provides individuals with appropriate redress mechanisms in connection with travel- related encounters or circumstances, including the correction or updating of an individual's information. Furthermore, when an individual requests access to his or her information, DHS will examine each request on a case-by-case basis, and, after conferring with the appropriate component or agency, may waive applicable exemptions in appropriate circumstances where it would not appear to interfere with or adversely affect the law enforcement or national security purposes of the systems from which the information is recompiled or in which it is contained. Again, DHS shall not assert any exemption with respect to information submitted by and collected from the individual or the individual's representative in the course of any redress process associated with the underlying system of records. Regulatory Requirements A. Regulatory Impact Analyses Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several analyses. In conducting these analyses, DHS has determined: 1. Executive Order 12866 Assessment This rule is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review” (as amended). Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Nevertheless, DHS has reviewed this rulemaking, and concluded that there will not be any significant economic impact. 2. Regulatory Flexibility Act Assessment Pursuant to section 605 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 605(b), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement and Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), DHS certifies that this rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rule would impose no duties or obligations on small entities. Further, the exemptions to the Privacy Act apply to individuals, and individuals are not covered entities under the RFA. 3. International Trade Impact Assessment This rulemaking will not constitute a barrier to international trade. The exemptions relate to criminal investigations and agency documentation and, therefore, do not create any new costs or barriers to trade. 4. Unfunded Mandates Assessment Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), (Pub. L. 104-4, 109 Stat. 48), requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of certain regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments, and the private sector. This rulemaking will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments, or on the private sector. B. Paperwork Reduction Act The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(PRA)(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) requires that DHS consider the impact of paperwork and other information collection burdens imposed on the public and, under the provisions of PRA section 3507(d), obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for each collection of information it conducts, sponsors, or requires through regulations. DHS has determined that there are no current or new information collection requirements associated with this rule. C. Executive Order 13132, Federalism This action will not have a substantial direct effect 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, and therefore will not have federalism implications. D. Environmental Analysis DHS has reviewed this action for purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) and has determined that this action will not have a significant effect on the human environment. E. Energy Impact The energy impact of this action has been assessed in accordance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act

(EPCA)Public Law 94-163, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6362). This rulemaking is not a major regulatory action under the provisions of the EPCA. List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5 Sensitive information, Privacy, Freedom of information. For the reasons stated in the preamble, DHS amends Chapter I of Title 6, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: PART 5—DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS AND INFORMATION 1. The authority citation for part 5 continues to read as follows: Authority: Pub. L. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135, 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq., 5 U.S.C. 301. Subpart A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552. 2. At the end of Appendix C to Part 5, add a new section 3 to read as follows: Appendix C to Part 5—DHS Systems of Records Exempt From the Privacy Act 3. DHS-ALL-005, Redress and Response Records System. A portion of the following system of records is exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (4); (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4); (e)(1), (2), (3), (4)(G) through (I), (5), and (8); (f), and (g); however, these exemptions apply only to the extent that information in this system records is recompiled or is created from information contained in other systems of records subject to such exemptions pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(5). Further, no exemption shall be asserted with respect to information submitted by and collected from the individual or the individual's representative in the course of any redress process associated with this system of records. After conferring with the appropriate component or agency, DHS may waive applicable exemptions in appropriate circumstances and where it would not appear to interfere with or adversely affect the law enforcement or national security purposes of the systems from which the information is recompiled or in which it is contained. Exemptions from the above particular subsections are justified, on a case-by-case basis to be determined at the time a request is made, when information in this system records is recompiled or is created from information contained in other systems of records subject to exemptions for the following reasons:

(a)From subsection (c)(3) because making available to a record subject the accounting of disclosures from records concerning him or her would specifically reveal any investigative interest in the individual. Revealing this information could reasonably be expected to compromise ongoing efforts to investigate a known or suspected terrorist by notifying the record subject that he or she is under investigation. This information could also permit the record subject to take measures to impede the investigation, e.g., destroy evidence, intimidate potential witnesses, or flee the area to avoid or impede the investigation.

(b)From subsection (c)(4) because portions of this system are exempt from the access and amendment provisions of subsection (d).

(c)From subsections (d)(1), (2), (3), and

(4)because these provisions concern individual access to and amendment of certain records contained in this system, including law enforcement counterterrorism, investigatory, and intelligence records. Compliance with these provisions could alert the subject of an investigation of the fact and nature of the investigation, and/or the investigative interest of intelligence or law enforcement agencies; compromise sensitive information related to national security; interfere with the overall law enforcement process by leading to the destruction of evidence, improper influencing of witnesses, fabrication of testimony, and/or flight of the subject; could identify a confidential source or disclose information which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of another's personal privacy; reveal a sensitive investigative or intelligence technique; or constitute a potential danger to the health or safety of law enforcement personnel, confidential informants, and witnesses. Amendment of these records would interfere with ongoing counterterrorism, law enforcement, or intelligence investigations and analysis activities and impose an impossible administrative burden by requiring investigations, analyses, and reports to be continuously reinvestigated and revised.

(d)From subsection (e)(1) because it is not always possible for DHS or other agencies to know in advance what information is relevant and necessary for it to complete an identity comparison between the individual seeking redress and a known or suspected terrorist. Also, because DHS and other agencies may not always know what information about an encounter with a known or suspected terrorist will be relevant to law enforcement for the purpose of conducting an operational response.

(e)From subsection (e)(2) because application of this provision could present a serious impediment to counterterrorism, law enforcement, or intelligence efforts in that it would put the subject of an investigation, study, or analysis on notice of that fact, thereby permitting the subject to engage in conduct designed to frustrate or impede that activity. The nature of counterterrorism, law enforcement, or intelligence investigations is such that vital information about an individual frequently can be obtained only from other persons who are familiar with such individual and his/her activities. In such investigations it is not feasible to rely upon information furnished by the individual concerning his own activities.

(f)From subsection (e)(3), to the extent that this subsection is interpreted to require DHS to provide notice to an individual if DHS or another agency receives or collects information about that individual during an investigation or from a third party. Should the subsection be so interpreted, exemption from this provision is necessary to avoid impeding counterterrorism, law enforcement, or intelligence efforts by putting the subject of an investigation, study, or analysis on notice of that fact, thereby permitting the subject to engage in conduct intended to frustrate or impede that activity.

(g)From subsections (e)(4)(G),

(H)and

(I)(Agency Requirements) because portions of this system are exempt from the access and amendment provisions of subsection (d).

(h)From subsection (e)(5) because many of the records in this system coming from other system of records are derived from other domestic and foreign agency record systems and therefore it is not possible for DHS to vouch for their compliance with this provision; however, the DHS has implemented internal quality assurance procedures to ensure that data used in the redress process is as thorough, accurate, and current as possible. In addition, in the collection of information for law enforcement, counterterrorism, and intelligence purposes, it is impossible to determine in advance what information is accurate, relevant, timely, and complete. With the passage of time, seemingly irrelevant or untimely information may acquire new significance as further investigation brings new details to light. The restrictions imposed by (e)(5) would limit the ability of those agencies' trained investigators and intelligence analysts to exercise their judgment in conducting investigations and impede the development of intelligence necessary for effective law enforcement and counterterrorism efforts. The DHS has, however, implemented internal quality assurance procedures to ensure that the data used in the redress process is as thorough, accurate, and current as possible.

(i)From subsection (e)(8) because to require individual notice of disclosure of information due to compulsory legal process would pose an impossible administrative burden on DHS and other agencies and could alert the subjects of counterterrorism, law enforcement, or intelligence investigations to the fact of those investigations when not previously known.

(j)From subsection

(f)(Agency Rules) because portions of this system are exempt from the access and amendment provisions of subsection (d).

(k)From subsection

(g)to the extent that the system is exempt from other specific subsections of the Privacy Act. Dated: July 5, 2007. Hugo Teufel III, Chief Privacy Officer. [FR Doc. E7-13564 Filed 7-13-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-10-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of the Comptroller of the Currency 12 CFR Part 26 [Docket ID OCC-2007-0006] RIN 1557-AD01 FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 12 CFR Part 212 [Regulation L; Docket No. R-1272] FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION 12 CFR Part 348 RIN 3064-AD13 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of Thrift Supervision 12 CFR Part 563f [Docket ID OTS-2007-0013] RIN 1550-AC09 Management Official Interlocks AGENCIES: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Treasury; Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; and Office of Thrift Supervision, Treasury. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Office of Thrift Supervision

(OTS)(collectively, the Agencies) are amending their rules regarding management interlocks to implement section 610 of the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006 (FSRRA) and to correct inaccurate cross-references. DATES: Effective on July 16, 2007, the interim rule as published on January 11, 2007, (72 FR 1274) is adopted as a final rule without change. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: *OCC:* Heidi M. Thomas, Special Counsel, Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division,

(202)874-4688; Sue Auerbach, Counsel, Bank Activities and Structure Division,

(202)874-5300; or Jan Kalmus, Senior Licensing Analyst, Licensing Activities Division,

(202)874-4608, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 250 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20219. *Board:* Andrew S. Baer, Counsel,

(202)452-2246, or Jennifer L. Sutton, Attorney,

(202)452-3564, Legal Division, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20551. For users of Telecommunication Device for the Deaf

(TDD)only, contact

(202)263-4869. *FDIC:* Patricia A. Colohan, Senior Examination Specialist, Division of Supervision and Consumer Protection,

(202)898-7283, or Mark Mellon, Counsel, Legal Division,

(202)898-3884. *OTS:* David J. Bristol, Senior Attorney,

(202)906-6461, Business Transactions Division, Office of Thrift Supervision, or Donald W. Dwyer, Director of Applications, Examinations and Supervision—Operations,

(202)906-6414, 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20552. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background The Depository Institution Management Interlocks Act (12 U.S.C. 3201 *et seq.* ) (Interlocks Act or Act) prohibits individuals from simultaneously serving as a management official 1 at two unaffiliated depository institutions or their holding companies (collectively, depository organizations) under certain circumstances. For example, section 203(1) of the Act (12 U.S.C. 3202(1)) prohibits interlocks between unaffiliated depository organizations if each depository organization (or a depository institution affiliate thereof) has an office in the same relevant metropolitan statistical area

(RMSA)(RMSA prohibition), unless one of the depository organizations involved has total assets below a specified threshold (small institution exception). Prior to enactment of the FSRRA, the total asset threshold for this small institution exception was $20 million. However, section 610 of the FSRRA amended section 203(1) of the Interlocks Act by raising this asset threshold to $50 million, effective as of October 13, 2006. 2 1 Each of the Agencies' regulations generally define “management official” to include a director, an advisory or honorary director of a depository institution with total assets of $100 million or more, a senior executive officer, a branch manager, a trustee of a depository organization under the control of trustees, and any person who has a representative or nominee serving in such capacity. *See* 12 CFR 26.2(j) (OCC); 12 CFR 212.2(j) (Board); 12 CFR 348.2(j) (FDIC); and 12 CFR 563f.2(j) (OTS). 2 Pub. L. 109-351, section 610, 120 Stat. 1966 (Oct. 13, 2006). II. Summary of Interim Rule In January 2007, the Agencies adopted on an interim basis, and requested public comment on, amendments to their rules in order to implement section 610 of the FSRRA. 3 Specifically, the interim rules modified the regulatory RMSA prohibition to conform to revised section 203(1) of the Act by allowing a management official of one depository organization to serve as a management official of an unaffiliated depository organization if the depository organizations (or their depository institution affiliates) have offices in the same RMSA and one of the depository organizations in question has total assets of less than $50 million. 3 *See* 72 FR 1274, Jan. 11, 2007. The interim rule also made technical changes to correct inaccurate cross-references in the definition of management official in each of the Agencies' rules. III. Explanation of Final Rule The Agencies received two comments on the interim rule, both of which were filed by trade associations representing banking organizations. Both commenters supported the interim rule, stating that the rule will afford small banking organizations greater access to qualified individuals who may serve as management officials. Both commenters also urged the Agencies to consider further raising the asset threshold for the small institution exception to the RMSA prohibition. As noted in the interim rule, FSRRA raised the asset threshold, and neither FSRRA nor the Act gives the Agencies discretion to modify the asset-size threshold for the small institution exception. After carefully considering the comments received, the Agencies have adopted a final rule that is identical to the interim rule. IV. Regulatory Analysis Plain Language Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (12 U.S.C. 4809) requires the Agencies to use “plain language” in all rules published in the **Federal Register** after January 1, 2000. The Agencies believe the final rule is presented in a simple and straightforward manner. Administrative Procedure Act The final rule takes effect upon publication in the **Federal Register** . As noted in the interim rule, the changes adopted in the rule implement a statutory change that took effect upon enactment on October 13, 2006, and the technical corrections of cross-references effected by the rule are not substantive. The new statutory provision itself gives the Agencies no discretion to modify the asset-size threshold for the small institution exception. Accordingly, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d), the agencies conclude that there is good cause for making this rule effective immediately upon publication in the **Federal Register** . Regulatory Flexibility Act Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(RFA)(5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the regulatory flexibility analysis otherwise required under section 603 of the RFA (5 U.S.C. 603) is not required if the head of the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and the agency publishes such certification and a statement explaining the factual basis for such certification in the **Federal Register** along with its rule. Pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, each of the Agencies certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Agencies expect that this rule will not create any additional burden on small entities. The final rule relaxes the criteria for obtaining an exemption from the RMSA prohibition, and specifically addresses the needs of small entities by allowing greater numbers of small organizations to qualify for the small institution exception from the RMSA prohibition. Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. Paperwork Reduction Act In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506; 5 CFR 1320 Appendix A.1), the Agencies have determined that no collections of information pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act are contained in the final rule. OCC and OTS Executive Order 12866 Statement The OCC and OTS each have independently determined that the final rule is not a “significant regulatory action” as defined in Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, a regulatory assessment is not required. OCC and OTS Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995 Statement Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1532), requires the OCC and OTS to prepare a budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule that includes 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 in any one year. However, this requirement does not apply to regulations that incorporate requirements specifically set forth in law. Because this final rule implements section 610 of the FSRRA, the OTS and OCC have not conducted an Unfunded Mandates Analysis for this rulemaking. List of Subjects 12 CFR Part 26 Antitrust, Holding companies, National banks. 12 CFR Part 212 Antitrust, Banks, Banking, Holding companies. 12 CFR Part 348 Antitrust, Banks, Banking, Holding companies. 12 CFR Part 563f Antitrust, Holding companies, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings associations. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency 12 CFR Chapter I PART 26—MANAGEMENT OFFICIAL INTERLOCKS Accordingly, the interim rule amending 12 CFR Part 26 which was published at 72 FR 1276 on January 11, 2007, is adopted as a final rule without change. Federal Reserve System 12 CFR Chapter II PART 212—MANAGEMENT OFFICIAL INTERLOCKS Accordingly, the interim rule amending 12 CFR Part 212 which was published at 72 FR 1276 on January 11, 2007, is adopted as a final rule without change. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 12 CFR Chapter III PART 348—MANAGEMENT OFFICIAL INTERLOCKS Accordingly, the interim rule amending 12 CFR Part 348 which was published at 72 FR 1276 on January 11, 2007, is adopted as a final rule without change. Office of Thrift Supervision 12 CFR Chapter V PART 563f—MANAGEMENT OFFICIAL INTERLOCKS Accordingly, the interim rule amending 12 CFR Part 563f which was published at 72 FR 1276 on January 11, 2007, is adopted as a final rule without change. Dated: May 11, 2007. John C. Dugan, Comptroller of the Currency. By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 10, 2007. Jennifer J. Johnson, Secretary of the Board. Dated at Washington, DC, this 19th day of June, 2007. By order of the Board of Directors. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Valerie J. Best, Assistant Executive Secretary. By the Office of Thrift Supervision, May 8, 2007. John M. Reich, Director. [FR Doc. 07-3441 Filed 7-13-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 19

Traces to 19 documents

U.S. Code