OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP87-00058R000400070009-6
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 17
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 23, 2012
• Sequence Number: 9
• Publication Date: June 26, 1986
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23: CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
ROUTING AND RECORD SHEET
irec or o nformation Servic
1206 Ames
TO: (OTcer designation, room number, and
bu i Id ing I
EO/DDA
1D24 HDQS.
OfFICER'S
INITIALS
OIS*86*362 `STAY
-fib ~une798s--------STAY
COMMENTS (Number ?och comment to show from whom
b whom. Drew o line ocross column alter ?ach comment.)
As requested, we have reviewed
the OMB Privacy Act Guidance with
respect to the "Call Detail"
program.
Such guidance was necessitated
by the fact ,that records and record
systems created by virti.u~e of the
"Call Detail" program y be
subject to the Privacy Act and its
various strictures. In sum, the
guidance is good, clear, and
rational. Their particular
recommendation on page 18984, which
has been highlighted and bracketed,
will be imQlemented by the Office
of Information Services IF the
Agency goes forward with a "Call
Detail" program. If this should be
the case, the action Agency
component should be in touch with
us so that we can take the
necessary steps with respect to the
Privacy Act.
STAY
f Oq M ~ ~ O uSEDIT10NW3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23: CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23: CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
DA:C/OIS/IPD
Distribution:
Original & 1 - Addressee
4-D/OIS
1 - LAOIS
1 - C/OIS/IPD
1 - IPD SUBJECT: Legislation
STAT
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23: CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
~ )18882 Federal Regis..,r /Vol. 51, No: 100 J Friday; May !3, lb.,., /Notices
Diagnast~c Medical Misodminrstrvtion
The general abnormal occurrence
criterion notes that an event involving a
moderate or more severe impact on
public health or safety can ~e '
considered an abnormal occurrence.
Dote and Ploce--On December 9,
1985, a pstlent st Hospital Univenitario,
San loan, Puerto Rico, received x.98
milBcuries of iodine-131 Instead of a !0
to 1S microcuries dose usually given for
a ?A-hour thyroid uptake teat.
Notun and Proboble Consequences-
The patient arrived at the hospital's
Nuclear Medicine Division on December
9.1985, to receive iodine-13! (or ? L1-
hour thyroid test. The test was part of
the physician's plan to evaluate the
patient for hyperihyroldism. The usual
dose for such a diagnostic procedure st
the Nuclear Medicine Division is 10 to 1S
microcuries. instead, We technologist
mistakenly administered a dose of 4.98
millicuries which V the dose wually
given for whole body scans with iodine-
131. '
The patlent't referring physician was
notified of the misadministration. Based
on statements from We physidan. the
patient was a likely candidate for
iodine-131 therapy [or treatment of the
hyperthyroid condition: therefore, the
probable consequences for the petlent
would be consistent with the projected
medical treatment
Couse or Cousea-As discussed
above, the reason for the '
misadministratlon was due to an error
by the technologist.
Actions Taken to Prersnl Aecumenas
Licensee-Review with the nuclear
medicine staff the protocol used for
hyperthyroid patlents dosed with
radioiodine. '
NRt~The incident and the licensee's
protocol will be reviewed during the
next NRC routine inspection.
Dated in Wuhington, DG this 20th day o[
Mey 1e99. .
8.mw1). Ch111c: .
.
Secretory o/the Commrsiion.
(FR Doc. ea-rieee t~iied s-zz-aa a:a6 am)
seise acne rsw-sr.at
Public Servke Company of Mew
Hampshln, st aft Rewlpt of Add
Arrtltruat Miormatton; Tlnte ?for
Submission of Views on Mtitrust
When
Public Service Company of New
705 of the Atomic Energy Acf. u
amended, has Ned informatlon
requested by the Attorney Genera! for
antitrwt review as regoired by 10 CPR
Part !+0. Appendix L. This information
concerns a proposed new owner.l3UA
Power Corporation (EUA Power), to the
Seabrook Station. UNb i end Z located
in Rockingham County, New Hampshire.
The 81irr~ h precipitated by the
proposed transfer of ownership shares
of the Seabrook Station !v fiUA Power
presently held by the following owners:
Central Vermont Public Service
Corporatlon; Central Maine Power
Company; Bangor Hydro-ElecMc
Company; and the Maine Public Service
Corp' oratlon.
37re Notice of Receipt of Application
for Construction Permib snd Fadlity
Licenses and Availability of Appllcenb'
Envirocunentsl Report; Time for
Submission of Views on Mtltruet
Matters was published in the Federal
Register on August 9.1973 (38 FR 21522).
The Notice of Receipt of Fadlity
'Operating Licenses was pubihshed in the
Federal Reghtar on October 10.1981(18
FR 51330). . .
. Copies of the instant ftlir,g and the
documents listed above are available [or
ppublic exeminstlon and copyang fora
[ec at the Commission's Public
Document Room.1717 H Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20555 end at We Exeter
Public Library, Front Street, Exeter, Naw
Hampshire 03883. '
My person who wishes to have views
on antitrust matters with respect to the
EUA Power Corporation presented to
the Attorney Genera) for consideration
or who desires edditlona) informatlon
regarding the matters covered by this
notice, should submit such views or
requests for additional informatlon to
the U.S. Nudear Regulatory
Commission. Washington, DC.20656.
Atteiitlon: Director, Planning and '
Program Malysis Staff, Office of -
Nuclear Reactor Regulation. on a
before July Z2, 1988. -
Dated st Bethesda. Maryland, this 2lMh day
dMay, l9ee.
Por the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
iwN 4 Flmc6as,
Director~ogrom Molysis
eor Reactor Regulotion.
aS-11952 Flied b-~-iS; 8:48 am)
OFFICE OF YANAGEYENT ANO
8t1D~iET
Prit-ary Act of 1974; Proposed ~ - -
t3uidanw on the tsrtwry Act
Impllcatlons of "Gag Detsll" Programs
to Manage Employees' Uss of the
Government's TNet:omrrttmleatlons
Systems
Aottrsen: Oifioa of Manageererrt and
Budget. .. - . ~ ....
At:T10N: Notice snd request for public
comment on Proposed Guidance
implementing the Ptivscy Ad of 1074.
tiUMMARV: Pursuant to its
responstbllitles in section 8 of the
Privacy Act of 1974 (Pub. I,. 93.79),
OMB has developed proposed guidance
on how the recordkeeping provisions of
that Act affect agencies' programs (so-
called "call detail programi ') to collect
and use In[ormation relating to their
employees' use of long diNance
telephone systems. This proposal:
? Describes the purposes of call detail
programs snd explains how they work.
? Notes that cell detail records that
contain only telephone number an not
Privacy Act records, but that when
linked with a name, they become
Privacy Act records.
? Notes that when agencies start
retrieving by reference to a linked
' number of name, they are operating a
system of records.
? Urges sgendes not to create
attiftcisl ftling and nMeval schemes to
avoid the Act.
? Suggests agencies establish an
agency-wide system in which to
maintain these records. and provides a
model notlce for them to use.
? Dhcwees the disclosure provisions
of the Act as they would pertain to such
s call detail system, especially
emphasizing that infra-agency
disclosures for improper employee
surveUlanca purposes or to identify and
horses whin eblowen are not
sanctloned under section (b)(1).
? Interested psrtles are invited to
provide comments on thL proposal.
OAt'E: Comments must be received
before June 30.1988.
ADO1tES~ Send txt meats to the Office
of Management area Budget, Office of
information end Regulatory Affairs.
Room 9Z3S NEOB, Washington, DC
20503.
ls0t1 FUIrTHEII INfO11MAT10N CONTACT.
Robert N. Veeder, information Policy
Branch, OlltA, 202.95-t81~.
Proposed Guidanosa
1. Purpose.
Thh guidance is being offered in
eonJunetion with guidance on call
detailing published by the Genera(
Services Administration. Whereas
GSA's gnidsnce focuses on how to
trreate end operate such programs, this
document explains the ways in which
We Privacy Act of 1971 affects any
records generated during the coupe of
call detail p rams.
Nothing fn this guidance should be
construed to (e) authorize activities that
are not permitted by law; or (b) prohibit
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
.~ Federal ester / Vol: bi, No. 100 / Friday, Mey . 1988 /Notices 18983
o
es
rsa runs pace unrrg the telephone systems and then attempting
collodion of doto for thin report. The .to assign respomibWty for particular
report mtlay contain such technical caps to individual employees. Thep two-
h
activities expressly required to ba need. The intormatbm may coma from a
performed by law. Complying with these number od sources, a.g" from agenry
Guidelines, moreover, does not rellwe a lnstslled or utlllzed devices to record
Federal agency of the obligstlon to usage informstlon (pea regitlen or
comply with the provisions of We agency switd~Ing equipment} from
Privacy Act. Induding my provisions central agency mansgers such as the
not cited herein. General Services AdmlNstrstlom or the
Z. Scope. Defense Commuhicatlons Agenry; or
These Guidelines apply to all agendas directly from We providers of
tub~ect to the Privacy Act of 1974 (S telecommuNcatloru services.
U.S.C. 552x). There ere many different purposes for
8. Ejj'ective Dole. call dotal) programs. Agency managers
These Guidelines are eRective on the may use call detail informatlon to help
date of their issuance. them choose more efildent and txyt-
~. Dejinitioni. effective ways of oonunudcating. The
For the purposes of these Guidelines: lrtfamatloa may be wed to make
? All the terms darted in the Privsry decisions about acqu~ hardware,
Act of 187 spply. aoftwere..or services. an to develop
? "Ca0 detail report"-This is the management strategies [or using existlog
lnitlsl report of long-distance calls made telecommudcatlons capadty more
during a specified period. A ceU detsll sffic[ently. One sspect of this latter use
report msy be provided by a telephone maybe the development of programs to
gqompany, the General Services identlty unofficial nee of We agency's
AdmWstretlon, or it may originate from ? telephone system. To this end. call
a PBX (Private Branch Exchsnge) on an detail programs work by collecting
? agency's premises. No monitoring of information about the use of agency
ve
aoa t ' C
k
1 d '
Detail Records." These are records
generated from call detail reports
contains no irdormatlon directiy
Identifying the individuals making or
receivingg calls.
? .'Call Detail Information" or "Call
At this stage, a call detail report
orme on as t
e originating anmber, told p oee is to deter use of the
destination rmmber, destinatlon dry and' system for ono?dal purposes and to
State, date and time of day a call wee recoup for the government the cost of '
made, the du.-atlon of the call, and cost nnotBciel calla.
of the call B made on commercial tines. goon, We establishment of call detail
Rapid growth in automated data ? ??reco~" as ?? ? ? any item, collectlon
processing end telecommunicatlons or grouping of information shunt sn
technologies has crested new and ~ individual Wat is maintained by en
spedal problems relating tD the Pederd agenry Indnding, but not limited to. his
Government's cTeetion and maintenance education, Mandel tranead9bns.
of tnformatlon about individuals. At medical history, and criminal or
times, the capebilltles of Wese employment history sad that comtalna
technobgies have appeared to run 6L name. or We Mentifying camber.
ahead of statutes designed to manage symbo4 or other identifyhrg partlcaler
Wte kind of informatlon, particularly We assigned to the individual. such as e
Privacy Act. An example Is the 8nger~or voice print ot; a photograph:
establishment of call detail programs to
help agencies control the costs of A "system or records" Le-a group of
operating tbefr long distance telephone any such records from which
systems. Call detail programs develop information is retrieved by the name of
Information about bow an agency's the individual of other identifying
telecommunications system b being particular.
r
v
acy Act must be taken Into
coneideratlon.
S. Bockgrwnd.
t
in
cases, a ormatlan end records wW only information Wat consisb o[
ba linked with individuab and the "records" as defined by the Act. and
i
P
programs will become a goverament-
wide priority es part of a management
lnitlatlve on redudng We government's
admWstratlve cwts.
0. Privacy Act Implicatiana.
a. Call Detail Records as Privary Ad
Records. .
The Pdvary Act of 197 V the primary
statute controllin
We
oven~ment'
g
g
a nee
call detail informatlon or records wW of Wotmntlon about individual. Not all
contain no individually identlfiable individually identil3afik Informatloa,
information and there for no Prlvary Act however, qualltfee for We Act's
coneideratlons wW apply. In other protectlons. With but few exceptions,
h
f
through administratlve, teehninl or
Investigative follow-up. !n some cases
which is maintained by an agency io a
As we have Indicated in our original
Ptivsry Act implementing Guidelines (40
FR 2e9~9, July 9.1875), the mere
capablllty of reWeving records by an
identifying particular is not enough to
create a system of records; the ogency
moat actaally be doing so.
The threshold question for cell detail
intotmatlon, then.ls whether s
Nlephone.anmber Is a record within the
meaning of the Privacy Act. The answer
to this question depends upon how the
telephone number !s maintained.
Standing alone, a telephone number,
is not s Privacy Act record. To achieve
the status of a Privacy Act record a
telephone mm~ber must be maintained
In ? way Wat links it to an individual's
name or some otber identifying
pertlcular such as s Sodal Security
Account Number.
When an agenry assigns a specific
phone number to an employee and
ma[ntains that lnfonmetlon In a way that
the name and number are inseparably
connected, there is sufficient
identtficatlon Itnkage thst a Privacy Act
record,is created. (It should be noted
Wet the Privacy Act dose not require
Wst We record be unique to the '
individual, only Wat ft be "shout"him or
her and include his or her name or older
lndentifyfng particular. Thus. a
telephone number could be shared by
several individuals and still meet the
Privacy Act "teoord" defWtlon).
The Wtlal cell detsll reports which
contain only technical infonmetlan about
telephone usage do not consist of
records within We meaning of the
Pdvary Act and Wey will Werefore
never reach the level of a system of
records. Por many areas of
telecommunicatloae management, the
information to call detail reports will
never become systems of records and
the Privary Act will have red application.
When. however, cell detail records
are need in management pro ems
designed to control cosh and determine
individual eccountabWty for telephone
calls. Privary Act consideratlons must
be addressed, hs order to carry out these
kinds of call detail programs, agencies
wW have to link numbers and names eo
Wet they can determine who is
reeponsiWe for whet call. It is at this
point, Wst the telephone number meets
We Privary Act definition of a "record."
b. Coll Detail Records in Privacy Act
Systems of Records.
The next question, than. le when do
files coneietin of Privacy Act records
created by ll a telephone number
and an individue 'e name become a
system of recorde7 This occurs when
agencies use the Privacy Act record as a
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
t 18984 ~ ?Federal !._~ister / Yol..bl, No. 100 /Friday, Mey Za, i9t3t1 /Notices
key to retrieve informatlon from these . c. Disclosing from Co1J Dtatoil Records 'Yequind" to release under the FOIA.
files. Syatema under?Section (bl ojthe Disclosure under this interpretation did
While it is important to remember that PrivocYAcG ~ - not depend on the exletence of a FOIA
not every data base containing call The privacy Act provides 12 request for the records; the men finding
detail records will be a privacy Act exceptions to ib basic requirement that that no FOIA exemptlon could apply ,
system of records, agencies are ~ agendas mwt obtaLo the written and Wat the agency would therefore
cautioned against cresting artifidel consent of the record subject before have no choice but to disclose, was
tiling schemes manly to avoid the effect disclosing informatloa from a system of suffident. In tsct. agencies relied upon
of the Act when the eslablisbment of a records. The followingexceptlons are this interpretatlon of the requirements of
system of records would be appropriate. 'the ones most relevant to the proposed section (b)(2) to mske routine
' Since these records sn clearly intended Cell Detsil system of records: dteclosuns of msny documents.
to establish individua/neponsibWty for ? 6ectloo (b)(]).'To those officers especislly those traditionally thought to
long distance telephone use, their use by and employees of the agency which Min the public domain such as pnes
the agency could have serious Snandal maintains the record who have a need releases, final orders, telephone books,
can make certsin Wet legitimate disclosure o call detail records maybe
concerns about the lmplementatlon of made only when there ii on official
call detail programs (e.g., Improper use need to know the urjotmotion. The .
of the records for surveWance or following are examples of disclosures.
- employee 6arasement, unfairness, and that (b](1) would permit:
individual employees: By maintaining
these records in conformance with the
provisions of the Privacy Act. agendas
their dotles." This exception does not In Bartel, however, the court held that
contemplate unresMcted disclosures an agency must have received an actual
within the agency. Intro-agency FOIA request before disclosing pursuant
designed to deal with such conceraa.
Therefore, we recommend strongly
that agencies create an agency-wide _
~ ' to maintain call detall records that
I ~ and an used to determine
accountability for telephone wage.
'~ Such a system might contain the
following kinds of records: ?
rea
r
ancee, reco a (name an telephoaa ruling of the Court of Appeals for the
number, for example) maybe wmmoa D.C. Circuit in Borte/ v. FAA, 72S F.2d
to the call detail system and other 14oci (D.C. Cir.1891), longstanding ?
systems. agency practices and OMB
To help the agencies in ib ~ lnterpntatlon treated this section es
construction, we offer ? model system permitting agendas to fnitiote disclosure
notlce in Appendix L of material that they would be
system of records. Thw, Investl atlvs (b)(1) would not auWorise are: ~ ..e ?~"~"~~~"" """~"
8 ieneitlve clssses of Privacy Act ncordr
records of the Office of the Inspector -To agesccyy personnel to identify sad without having received a nqueet for
General, personnel records reflecting harass whisUeblowers; them.-
administrative or disciplinary actions, To agency personnel who an mealy Ap~lying the Bartel ruling to call
finance and accounting records relating curious to know who is calling whom. detai informatioa, then appesr to be
to cost attributlon and recoveries, and ? Sectlon (b)(2). "Required under three distinct categories of ncorde
the Uke, that ere generated from call &ctlon b52 of this tltle." Informatloa which could be considered for release
detall progrsms might be filed N .may be disclosed both Inside and under section (b)(2):
appropriate existing eyetems end outside the agency to the extent that the -Records which clearly fell into the
subjected to their particular disclosnn/ disclosure would be r+~quimd by We "public domain" category. We suggest
rafeguarding provisions. In other Freedom of Informatlon Act, Prior to the that these would be releasable either
t
t
d d
telephone calf.
To em loyeee of the agency to review
the call detsU lisb imd fdentl~y caW
made by the employee. Note that the
other optlon for this kind of disclosure
b a routine use (Sectlon (b)(3)).
Agencies thst are concerned about
eetabUshing that employee A her an
official need to'know about the calls
made from employee B's telephone
ma wi
h t
d
s
o a
opt a routine use . .
? The Wtial call detall month) Us
y ~ authorizing the disclosures.
fire whstever form it !s kept. e.g.. on To the employees of the Office of the
paper, megnetlc tape or dlskettesr Inspector General who a? conducting
? Locetvr information showing where firveetlgedoas into abuse of the FTS
in the agency spedBc telephones ate system;
located: To employees of the Olilce of Finance
? Records relating to the " and Accounting for processing of
Identiticetlon of individual employees, nimbursemenb for personal cells or
and (1) linking them with specific calling for processing of admWstrstlve
numbers; (2) linking Wem with ? ed9c , olYeets of ay pursuant to the
called number. . P provisions of the Debt Collectlon Acb
Notes that hot ell Privacy Acl records To Freedom of Informetlon Act
generated ss s result of call detail Officers and legs) advisers:
to sectlon (b)(2). in that case, the
plaintiff, Bartel, brought a Privacy Act
actlon asserting tbst Wa supervisor bad
gratuitously disclosed to three former ?
colleagues the fact that Bartel had
improperly obtained copies of their
personnel records. The court Interpreted
the standard for (b)(2) disclosures to
other then a conditlonsl one, i.e., not
meiely that the agency would have to
dLclose if such a nqueet wen received
but that We agency mutt Gave to do so ?
because an ectusl FOIA request for the
records hoe been made. Under this
ruUrfg. agency-initlated requeeb of FOIA
releasable material would be improper.
The court noted, however, that
material traditlonslly Geld to be in the
public domain might conetihrte an
exceptlon to its FOIA-nqueet-in-hand
4ttetpntatlon. Ia guidance tesued In
May of 1895 (Memorandum from Robert
P. Bedell to Senior Agency Offidels [or
Intormatlon Resources Msnagement.
Subject: Privacy Act Guidance-Update,
dated May ?A,198S) OMB suggested
(without agnehrg with the ruling) that
agencies contlnue to make dlecloeun o[
these kinds of records without having
received a FOIA nqueet. We cautioned,
lfewwRr_ r6wf ^swnrt?? ^6nnlet 6. rgnful
at the sgeney's Wtlatlon or in
response to a FOIA nqueet: The
former because they are o[ the
"traditionally released" class: the
letter, because no FO[A exemption
would prevent their disclosure. An
example would be the names and
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
_.
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
p
p
.
_Priva~ Acrt~s~ction~b~(2):~~~~_r~ .For example, routlne nee f21 in the Records relating to use of the agency
? Federal ,..:gister /Vol. 51, No. 100 / Priday, May Z~, 1888 ?/ Notices iFggS
office telephone numbers of sgency disclosure to the Thpertrnent of filee~ and at (insert component
employees. These are generally Justlce?to prosecute an egregivas ? locations).
considered public information abuser of an agency's long distance Categories oJlndividuo/s Covered by
obviously there may be eraepUoaa? telecommunications system. TMs the System:
or inv:.stigetive and intelligence dbclosura b functlonally compatible
organizations), asd the only since one of the purposes of the Agency employees who make long
applicable FOIA exemption. (b)(e ,the system is to identify abusers end distance calls and individuals who
personal privacy exemption, wou~d subject them to administratlve or legal received telepphone calls placed from
not apply. Thus, disclosures of en consegnescea. agency telephones.
numberewo Id be and ootti~ 1eek~pdhaone as well as other uses that ors necessary Categories oJRecords in the System:
PP P and
ro
er
under an applicable FOIA exemptlon
and which, therefore, would not be '
regiilred to be released. These could
ke, for example, records which
conlsin sensitive information relating
to ongoing investigative or personnel
matter such es records relating to the
pp
ou
ne o ce or Ca Detail Rewrds
use is s disclosure of information Wst 'this V s proposed notice; agencies
will be used for a purpose that is should modify It as appropriate.
caarpetlble wiW the purpose for which
We information was originally collected. System Narmer
The concept of compatibility ' = Call Detail'Records. -
ca?prises both junctionallyequirulent
uses: .System Location: ?
-For example, routine use (5) in the Records are stored at (name of
model notlce would authorize ? Headquarters Office conteinirrg central
.
the heed of an agency for en 9 offer the individual the chance to iepay representatives of the Generel Services
authorized civil or criminal law it (see OMH Guidelines on the Debt Administration end the National
enforcement actlvity. Collection Act, published to the Fedecal Archives end Records Administratlon
-Records for which no FOIA exemption Register on Apri111.1963 (48 FR 15556). who are conducting records
applies but wMch contain sensitvve it is possible Wet agencies will wish to management inspections under the
information, e.g., records which reflect disclose bzformetlon from call detail authority of !! U.S.C. 291N and 2906; (3)
We results of official ectlons taken as systems of records documenting an in response to a request for discovery or
a consequence of lervestigetlons of Individual's responsibility for unofficial for We appearance of a witness, to We
abuses of We telephone system. We long distance calls as pert of the bad extent Wet what is disclosed is relevant
suggest Wet agencies should be very debt dleclosnrs. For Wis reason, We to We subject matter involved in a
cautlous about Wtlating disclosure of mode( system notice et Appendix I pending judicial or admWstratlve
' Wese records without receiving a contains a statement idestlfying We proceeding; (!) in a proceeding before a
FOIA request since Wey appear b be system as one from which sac), court or adjudlcatlve body to We extent
of We category of records that disclosures can be made. Wat Wey are relevant end necessary to
concerned We Bartel court. Eves wiW ~? Contact Pbint jorGuidonce. We proceeding; (5) to an appropriate
e request, agencies wW have b Refer any questions about this FeBerel, State or local law enforcement
determine that the interest of We guidance to Robert N. Veeder, Office of agency responsible for investigating,
publican having the rowrd clearly Management end Hudget, Offce of prosecuting, or defending an action
outweighs the privacy interest of the 1Grformatlon and Regulatory Attain, 395- where there is sn Indication of actual or
record subject in order to overcome !81l. ~ ~ - potentlel violation of any government
We applicability of FOIA exemptlon Weedy 4 Cramm; ~ ~ action; (6) to employees of the agency to
(b)(e): Adminatntnr/ortnjom?tioaandR.sgulatory determine Weir individual responsibility
? Section (b)(3). "For a routine use." ~~?Jf'' fOr klePhorte calls, but only to the
extent Wat such disclosures consist of
See the routine use section of We model Appasdlx I-Pevpoasd Modal System comprehensive Mats of called end calling
system notice et A dix l A r
en
es N tl f U
rrtodet notice authorizes disclosure to
representatlvea of the General ?
Services Administration or the
Nations( Archives and Records '
Administration who are conducting
records management inspections
parwsnl to a epeclAc statutory
charter. 7lieir purpose b it no way
functional)y equivalent to the purpose
for which the system wee established;
.
reasonably be withheld under FOIA it is, however, clearly necessary sad
exemption (b)(e) and, therefore. would .Proper.
not be releasable under section (b)(z) 'Section (b)(1z).'To a consumer
o[ the Frivary Act. M agency would exc~~ort wgias dd d t the on anal ii
not release these kinds of records '~ b the Debt Collection Act of 1 eZ It
either at its own initiative or m authorizes a encies to disclose bad debt
response to s FOIA request. It should information to credit bureaus. Helots
be noted, however, that wch records doin so, however, a cies must
might be released wader other sections cam 8 ate a series of due r Ps
of the Act, each ss [b)(3]. 'Yor a P p ocess ate
" or (b)(7) at the re asst of designed to validate the debt end to
. routlne use
investigation of an employee for
abuse of the agency's long distance
telephone system
Such records could '
~mcpnvnca iv pace wng uiaiance Cella,
records indicatlng assignment of
telephone numbers to employees;
records relating to location of
telephones.
Authority jorMointenonce ojthe
System:
(Cite appropriate agency
"housekeeping" statute authorizing the
agency head to create, collect and keep
such records as are necessary to
manage Ws agency).
Routine Uses ojRecorda Molntained in
the System:
Records and data may be disclosed, ?
as Is necessary, (1) to Members of
Congress to respond to inquiries made
on behalf of individual constituents that
are record subjects; (z) to
numbers; (7) to respond to s Federal
with the hiring or retention of en
employee, We letting of a contract or
Issuance of a grant, license or other
benefit by We requesting agency. but
only to We extent that the information
disclosed is relevant and necessary to
the requesting agency's decision on We
matter. (Agencies should retrain from
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
18938 '
Faders! Relater /Vol. bl, No. 100 / Friday, May Z3, .889 / Notlcea
automatically applying all of their
blanket routlne use? to this system).
Disclosures pu?suant to 6 U.S.G
652o(6J(12).? ?
Diacloaurce may be mach from this
system to "consumer reporting ,
agenciei ' se defined in the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (1S U.S.C.1981s(n) or the
Federal Clsims Collection Act of 1999
(31 U.S.C. 3701(s)(3)). ?
Policies and Procticea jar Storing, ?
Retrieving, Accessing, Retaining, and
Disposing ojltecordi in System:
Storage:
Sojeguords:
. (Describe methods for eafegusrding).
Retention and Diapoaol?
Records arc disposed of as provided
to National Archives and Records
Administration General Records
Schedule 12.
System Manoger{a) and Addreas(ea).?
(List central system manager and
component.subeystem manages, u
appropriate)... _ s? .. . .
Notification Procedures: .
(Explain notification procedures).
Record Access Procedures:
(Explain how individuals may obtain
access to their records).
Record Bounce Categories:
Telephone assignment records; call
detail listings; results of adminietratlve
inquiries relating to assignment of
responsibility fat placement of specific
long distance calls.
Systems Exempted from Certain ~ : .
Provisions of the Act None.
(FR Doc. t19-1]t133 Filed ~2Z-89; 8:~6 amj
sago coca a?aa~-II
(Describe agency methods of storage).
Retrievability:
Records are rcMeved by employee
nsme or identification number, by name
of recipient of telephone call, by
telephone number.
and C In the excepted service. as
required by dull rervice rule VI. ?
Exceptions from the Competltlvs
Service. .
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION COIfTACT.
Tracy Spencer. (202) t323-8917.
fUVttEMENTARV INFORMATION: The
OfOce of Personnel Management
published its last monthly notice
updating appointing authorities .
eetablis ed or revoked under the
Excepted Service provisions of a CFR
Part 213 on May 2,1!188 (51 FR 18!12).
Indlvldual authorities established or
revoked under Schedule A. B or C .
between April 1, 7998, and Apri130.
1989, appear in a listing below. Future
notices w10 be ub8ahed on the fourth
Tuesday of each month, of as won u
ppossible thereafter. A consolidsted
hating of all authoritles wiU be
published a? of June 30 of each year.
Schedule A
No Schedule A exceptions wen
established during April. However, the
following exceptions are revoked:
Deportment ojStote
Schedule A excepted appointing
authority for pert-time or intermittent
gauge rceden employed by the
Internatlonai Boundary end Water
Commission. United States end Mexico.
was revoked because it i, no longer
used. E[tectlve April 19,1988.
Cenerol Services Administration
The Schedule A excepted appointing
authority for custodians, guards, and
related employees engaged in the
custody end preaervetlon of surpiw
factlitler pending their disposal was
revoked because it is no longer wed.
Effectlve April 8,1999.. _
Schedule B
The following exceptlon to
established:
Deportment ojT}+eosury
Not to exceed 10 positions engaged in
functions mandated by Public Law 99-
190, the duties of which require
expertise and knowledge gained as a
present or former employee of the ?
Synthetic Fuels Corporation. as an
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL employee of en organization canyiag
Excepted Servke; Schedules A. B,
and C
AoENCV:Office of Penonne)
Management.
ACTION: Notice.
out prof acts or contracts for the
Corporation, or ss an employee of a
Government agency involved In the
Synthetic Fueb Program. Appointment
under this authority may not exceed 4
yeas. E[fectlve Apri19,1988.
Schedule C
sveeeeARV: This gives notice of positions 'The following exceptlow are
placed or revoked under Schedules A, B, established:
Deportment of Agriculture .
Effective April 4,11189.
One Contidentlel Assistant to the
Secretary. Effective April ~, 1988.
One Confidential Aaeiatant to the
Secretary. Effective Apri130,1989.
Deportment ojCommerae
One Confidentiel7l,esietant to the
Director. Minority Business
Development Agency. Effective April 4,
1989.
One Confidential Assletanl to the
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import
Administration, Inlemational Trade
Administration. Effectlve April 17.1989.
One Specla) Aseletant to the Deputy
Adminiatretor, Natlonal Oceanic end
Atmospheric AdmWatreUon. Effective
April 18, 1988.
One Confldentia) Assistant to the
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Science
and Electronics, Internetlonal Trade
Administratlon. Ef[ectlve April 21,1988.
One Confidential Assistant to the
Special Assistant to the Deputy
Secretary' .Effective April 25, 1988.
One Associate Director to the
Director, Office of Ocean end Coastal
Resource Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric
AdminisUatlon. Effective Apr1129, 1968.
Deportment ojDejenae
One Special Aseletant to the
Ambassador end Political/Military
Couwelor. Effective Apri130,1988.
Departi?ent ojEducation
One Confidential Assistant to the
Under Secretary. Effectlve April 2.1999.
One Special Assistant to the
Secretary's Regional Repreeentatlve.
Effectlve April 1l, 1998.
One Special Assistant to the Asaietent
Secretary fat Legislation. Ettectlve April
17.31199.
One Confidential Aseletant to the
Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff/
Counselor to the Secretsry. Effective
April 23, 1988.
One Confidential Assistant to the
Chief of Staff/Counselor to the
Secretary. Effective April 28.1988.
D'epartmene ojEnergy
One Reeesrch Aeeistanl to the Spedel
Assistant to the Secretary. Effective
April 3,1988.
One Privste Secretary to a Member of
the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission. Effectlve April 15,1998.
One 3tatf Assistant to the Director of
Communtcetions.Offlce o[
Congressional, Intergovernmental and
Public ARai?. Effective Apti123,1998.
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
r v
~ 9 .IUN )986
TO: (Name, oll9ce symbol, room number,
uildi
is
~ DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION SER~IICES
Initials
U ~'~
Data
-C1
~, DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
s, DIRECTOR OF SECURITY
~~~ ~/S
JUN
a "~~
....
File
Note and Return
royal
For Clearance
i?er Converoation
R nested
For Correction
Preparo Repl
irculate
For Your Infownation
See Ms
mment
Investigate
Si naturo
Coordinatbn
Justi
REMARKS
#sl-3:
( t l C.~
o ~u-~ ~9a6
IMMEDIAT~
STAT
PLEASE PROVIDE THE DDA YOUR 47RITTEN COr~1E[~)TS
ON THIS ISSUE SO THAT PIE C1~d RESPOND TO OP'B
BY THEIR FIRPrt DUE DATE OF 30 JUNE 1986.
SUSPENSE: 27 JUNE 1986
ev. - )
Mserlbed by GSl1
1986
W ~~ /~'~
STAT
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-00058800.0400070009-6 _~
mil? ~/.~~r
FROM:
SUBJECT:
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
JUN 1 6 1986
.~'`15IZNI CHOLAS
Attached is a copy of guidance we published in the Federal
Register on May 23, 1986, on the Privacy Act implications of
"call detail" programs. We would be interested in your reaction.
IMME~:
3 ss 160c
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
., ~~ Federal Register /Vol. 51, No: 100 /Friday; May 23, 1988 /Notices
Diognostrc Medical Mtsatlmintstrotion
The general abnormal occurrence
criterion notes that an event involving a
moderate or more seven impact tm
public health or safety can i;e
considered an abnormal occurrence.
Dote and P/oce-0n December 9,
1985, a patient at Hospital Universitario,
San Juan. Puerto Rico, received 4.98
millicuries of iodine-131 instead of s 10
to 15 microcuries dose usually given [or
a 24-hour thyroid uptake test
Noture and Probob/e Consequencea-
The patient arrived at the hospital's
Nuclear Medicine Division on December
9, 1985, to receive iodine-131 for a 24-
hour thyroid test. The test was pert of
the physician's plan to evailuete the
patient for hyperthyroidism. The usual
dose !or such s diagnostic procedure et
the Nuclear Medicine Division is 10 to 15
microcuries. Instead, the technologist
mistakenly administered a dose of 4.98
millicuries which is the dose wually
given for whole body scans with iodine-
131.
The patient's referring physician was
notified of the misadministration. Based
on statements from the physi?an. the
patient was a likely candidate for
iodine-131 therapy for treatment of the
hyperthyroid condition: therefore, the
probable consequences for the patient
would be consistent with the projected
medical treatment.
Cause or Causes-As discussed
above, the reason for the
misadministration was due to en etror
by the technologist.
AcL'ons Taken to Pherent Recutnenoe
Licensee-Review with the nuclear
medicine staff the protocol used for
hyperthyroid patients dosed with
radioiodine.
NR~The incident and the licensee's
protocol will be reviewed during the
next NRC routine inspection.
Dated in Washington. DG this 20th day of
May 1988.
Samuel ]. Cbillc.
Secretory o/the Commission
[FR Doc. 86-11888 Filed S-?~89; 6:sb am]
ssuuw coot ass?ti-o
Public Service Company of New
i~tampshire. at al.; Receipt of Additional
Arttltrvst Informatoot>: Time for
Submission of Views on Mtltrust
Matters
Pnblic Service Company of iVew
Hampshire, e< a/., pursuant to section
105 of the Atomic Flrergy Act, u
emended, has filed information
requested by the Attorney General for
antitrust review as required by 10 CFR
Part 50. Appendix L. This information
concerns a proposed new owner, EUA
Power Corporation (EUA Power), in the
Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2 located
in Rockingham County, New Hampshire.
The filing h precipitated by the
proposed transfer of ownership shares
of the Seabrook Station to EUA Power
presently held by the following owners:
Central Vermont Public Service
Corporation; Central Maine Power
Company; Bangor Hydro-Electric
Company; and the Maine Public Service
Corppotation.
'i'he Notice of Receipt of Application
for Construction Permits and Facility
Licenses and Availability of Applicants'
Environmental Report; Time for
Submission of Views on Antitrust
Matters was published in the Federal
Register on August 9, 1973 (38 FR 21522).
The Notice of Receipt of Facility
'Operating Licenses was published in the
Federal Register on October 19,1981 (48
FR 51930).
_ Copies of the iaatant filing and the _
documents listed above are available for
public examination and copying for a
fee et the Commission's Public
Document Room,1717 H Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20555 end at We Exeter
Public Library, Front Street. Exeter, New
Hampshire 03883. '
My person who wishes to have views
on antitrust matters with respect to the
EUA Power Corporation presented to
the Attorney General for consideration
or who desires additional information
regarding the matters covered by this
notitx, should submit such views or
requests for additional Wonnation to
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555,
Attention: Director, Planning and
Program Malysis Staff, Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation. on or
before July 22,19.
Dated et Bethsads, Maryland this 20th day
oI May, it1E6.
Por the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
less Ir FuncLes.
Director, Planning and Progmm Molysia
StoJ); Ofjica o/Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR-Doc. BS-11852 Filed'.~22-8,r, a:s5 am]
ssusa coot ras.ot-~
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET
Prtvary Act of 1974; Proposed
Guldanq on tM Privacy Act
Implications of "Call Detail" Prosrams
to Manse Employees' Use of the
Government's Telecommunications
Systems .
AOtttrCY: Office of Management and
Budget. ..... _
ACTION: Notice end request for public
comment on Proposed Guidance
Implementing the Privacy Act of 1:)74.
fUMMARr: Pursusnt to its
responsibilities in section a of the
Privacy Act of 1974 (Pub. V 93-,579),
OMB has developed proposed guidance
on how the recordkeeping provisions of
that Act affect agencies' programs (so-
called "call detail programs") to collect
and use information relating to their
employees' use of long distance
telephone systems. This proposal:
? Describes the purposes of cell detail
programs and explains how they work.
? Notes that call detail records that
contain only telephone numbers ere not
Privacy Act records, but that when
linked with n name, they become
Privacy Act records.
? Notes that when agencies alert
reMeving by reference to a linked
number or name, they are operating e
system of records.
? Urges agencies not to create
artificial filing and retrieval schemes to
avoid the Act.
? Suggests agencies establish an
agency-wide system in which to
maintain these records, end provides a
model notice for them to use.
? Discusses the disclosure provisions
of the Act as they would pertain to such
a call detail system, especially
emphasizing that infra-agency
disclosures for improper employee
surveillance purpoeea or to identify and
harass whiatleblowers are not
sanctioned under section (b)(1).
Interested parties are invited to
provide rlvmm~nts on this proposal.
OAT'C Comments mwt be received
before June 30.19118.
AOORESx Send co meats to the Office
of Management and Budget. Office of
Wormetion end Regulatory Affairs,
Room 9235 NEOB, Washington, DC
20503.
FOR t=UATMER MFORMATION COt~ITACT'.
Robert N. Veeder, Information Policy
Branch, OIRA, 20295.814.
Propoesd Guidance:
1. Purpose.
This guidance is being offered in
conjunction with guidance on cell
detailing published by the General
Services Administration. Whereas
GSA's guidance focuses on how to
taeete end operate ouch progrema, this
document explains the ways in which
the Privacy Act of 1974 affects any
records generated during die course of
call detail programs.
Nothing in this guidance should be
construed to (s) authorize activities that
are not permitted by Jew; or (b) prohibit
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
Fedora. Register / Vol: 51. No. 100 /Friday. May 23. 1988 /Notices
activities expressly required to be
performed by law. Complying with these
Criidelines, moreover, does not relieve a
Federal agency of the obligation to
comply with the provisions of the
Privacy Act, including any provisions
not cited herein.
2 Scope.
These Guidelines apply to all agencies
subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5
U.S.C. 552a).
3. Effective Date.
These Guidelines are effective on the
date of their issuance.
4. Definitions.
For the purposes of these Guidelines:
? All the terms defined in the Privacy
Act of 1974 apply.
? "Call detail report"-This is the
initial report of long-distance calla made
during a specified period. A call detail
report may be provided by a telephone
r~ompany, the General Services
Administration, or it may originate fiom
a PBX (Private Branch Exchange) on en
? agency's premises. No monitoring of
conversations taker place during the
collection of data for this report. The
report may contain such technical
information es the originating anmber,
destination member, destination city and
State, date and time of day a call was
made, We du.-ation of We call, and cost
o[ We call if made on commercial lines.
At this stage, a call detail report
contains no information directly
identifying We individuals making or
receiving calla.
? "Call Detail Information" or "Call
Detail Records." These are records
generated from call detail reports
Wrough administrative, technial or
investigative follow-up. In some cases
call detail information or records wrill
contain no individually identifiable
information and Were for no Privacy Act
considerations will apply. In nWer
cases, We information and records will
be linked wild mdividuels and We
Privacy Act must be taken into
consideration.
5. Background.
Rapid growth In automated data
processing and telecommunications
technologies hoe created new and
special problems relating Oo the Federal
Government's creation and maintenance
of information about individual. At
times, the capabilities of Wese
technologies Gave appeared to tun
ahead of statutes designed to manage
Wie kind of information, particularly the
Privacy Act. An example is the
establishment of call detail programs to
help agencies control We costs of
operating their long distance telephone
systems. Cell detail programs develop
information about how an agency's
telecommunications ayetem is 6aing
used. The information may come from a As we have indicated in our original
number of sources, e.g" from agency privacy Act implementing Guidelines (40
installed or utilized devices m record FR 28949, July 9,1975), the mere
usage information (pen register or capability of retrieving records by an
agency switching equipment); from identifying particular is not enough to
central agency manager such as the create a system of records; the agency
General Services Administration or the must actually be doing ao.
Defense Commutrications Agency; or The threshold question for call detail
directly from the provider of information, then, is whether a
telecommunications services. telephone number is a record within the
There are many different purposes for meaning of the Privacy Act. The answer
call detall programs. Agency manager to this question depends upon how the
may use call detail information to help telephone number is maintained.
them choose more efficient sad cost- Stendin alone, a tale hone number,
effective ways of communicating. The g P
information may be used to make is not a Privacy Act record. To achieve
decisions about acquiring hardware. the status of a Privacy Act record. e
software,.or services, and to develop telephone number must be maintained
management atrateaies for vsirrn e~ciutine ~ a way that links it to an individual's
efficiently. One aspect of this latter use P~~m' arch ae a Social Security
maybe the development of programs to Account Number.
identify unofficial use of the agency's When an agency aBaigns a specific
telephone system. To this end call phone number to an employee and
detail programs work by collecting maintains that information in a way that
information about the use of agency the name and number are inseparably
telephone systems and then attempting connected. there is sufficient
to asaIgn responsibility for particular identification linkage that a Privacy Act
caIIs to fndividual employees. Their two- record is created. (It should be noted
fold purpose is to deter use of the Wet the Privacy Act does not require
ayetem for unofficial purposes and to Wat We record be unique to the '
recoup for We government the cost of ' individual, only Wat it be "about" him or
unofficial calla. her and include hie or her name or other
Soon, We establishment of cab detail indentifying particular. Thus, e
programs will become agovernment- telephone number could be shared by
wide priority as part of a management several individuals and still meet We
initiative on reducing We government's Privacy Act 'Yecord" definition).
administrative costs. The initial call detail reports which
6. Privacy Act Implications. contain only technical Information about
a. Call Detail Records as Privacy Act ~ telephone usage do not consist of
Records. records within We meaning of We
The Privacy Act of 1974 l the primary privacy Act and Wey will Werefore
statute controlling We government's use never reach We level of a system of
of information eboat individual. Not all records. Por many areee of
individually identifiable information, telecommunications management. We
however, qualifies for We Act's information in call detail reports will
protections. ~W but few exceptions, never become systems of records and
only information that consists of the Privacy Act will Gave no application.
"records" as defined by We Act, and When, however, cell detail records
which is maintained by en agency in a are treed in mane ement ro ems
"system of records," triggers We Act's designed to control costa and determine
provisions. The Privacy Act defines a
" `record" as "' any item, collection individual accountability for telephone
or grouping of information eboot en calla, Privacy Act considerations must
individual that is maintained by an be addressed. In order to carry out these
agency including, but not limited to, his kinds of call detail programs, agencies
education, fiaencial transactions, will have to link numbers and names so
medical history, and r~i'minal or Wet Wey can determine who ie
employment history and that contains responaibde for what call. It is at this
his name. or the identifying number, Point, Wat We telephone number meets
symbol, or older identifying particular We Privacy Act definition of a "record."
assigned to the individual, each as a b. Coll Detail Records in Pn'vocy Act
finge~ or voice print apt a photograph: Systems of Records.
' The next question, then, is when do
A "system or records" is--a Group of files coneiating of Privacy Act records
any such records from which created by linking a telephone number
Information is retrieved by We name of and en individual's name become e
the individual or other identifying ayetem of records? Thia occurs when
particular. agencies use the Privacy Act record as e
/~
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
- 18984 federal Register / Vol. 51, No. 100 /Friday, May 23, 1988 /Notices
..
key to retrieve information from these a Disclosing from Call D~etailRecorda "required" to release under the FOIA.
files. Systems under~Section (b) of the Disclosure under this interpretation did
While it is important to remember that PrirocyAct - not depend on the existence of a FOIA
not every data base containing call The Privery Act provides 12 request for the records; the mere finding
detail records will be a privacy Act exceptions to iU basic requirement that that no FOIA exemption could apply
system of records, agencies are - agencies must obtain the written and that the agency would therefore
cautioned against creating artificial consent of the record subject before have no choice but to disclose, was
Tiling schemes merely to avoid the affect disclosing information from a system of sufficient. In tact, agencies relied upon
of the Act when the establishment of a records. The foliowingexceptions are this interpretation of the requirements of
system of records would be appropriate. "the ones most relevant to the proposed section (b)(2) to make routine
Since these records ere clearly intended Call Detail system of records: disclosures of many documents,
to establish individual responsibility for ? Section (b)(t).'To those officers especially those traditionally thought to
long distance telephone use, their use by and employees of the agency which be in the public domain such as press
the agency could have serious financial maintains the record who have aneed - releases, final orders, telephone books,
or disciplinary consequences for for the record in the performance of and the like.
individual employees. By maintaining their duties." This exception does not In Bortel, however, the court held that
these records in conformance with the contemplate unrestricted disclosures an agency moat have received en actual
provisions of the Privacy Act, agencies within the egenry. Intro-agency FOIA request before disclosing pursuant
can make certain that legitimate disclosure of call detail records may be to section (b)(2). In that case, the
concerns about the implementation of made only when there is en official plaintiff, Bartel, brought a Privacy Act
call detail programs (e.g.. improper use need to know the information. The action asserting that his supervisor had
of the records for surveillance or following are examples of disclosures gratuitously disclosed to three former
employee harassment, unfelrness, and that (b)(1) would permiL? colleagues the fact that Bartel had
record accuracy) are~dealt with Ina -To individual supervisors to ~ improperly obtained copies of their
procedural framework that was determine resppneibility for specific personnel records. The court Interpreted
designed to deal with such wncerns. telephone caW. the standard for (b)(2) disclosures to
Therefore, we recommend strongly To employees of the agency to review other than a conditional one, i.e., not
that agencies create an agency-wide the call detail lints and identify calls merely that the agency would have to
Privacy Act system of records is which made by the employee. Note that the disclose ijsuch a request were received
to meintaih call detail records that other option for this kind of disclosure but that the agency must have to do so
contain information about individuals L a routine use (Section (b)(3)). ~ because an actual FOIA request for We
and are used to determine Agencies that are concerned about records has been made. Under this
accountability for telephone usage. ~ setabliahing that employee A has an rulinfg, egenry-initiated requests of FOIA
Such a system might contain the official need to'know about the calls releasable material would be improper.
following kinds of records? made from employee B's telephone The court noted, however, that
? The initial call detail monthl lis may wish to adopt a routine use material traditionally held to be in the
y ~ authorizing the disclosures. ublic domain mi ht
(in whatever form it is kept, e.g., on p g conatihrte an
paper, magnetic tape or diskettes ; -To the employees of the Office of the exception to its FOIA-request-in-hand
) Inspector General who are conducting interpretation. In guidance issued in
? Locator information showing where imreetigetioaa into abuse of the FTS Mey of 1tt85 (Memorandum from Robert
in the agency specific telephones are system; P. Bedell to Senior Agency Officials for
located: -To employees of the Office of Finance Wormation Resources Management,
Records relating to the ' and Accounting for processing of Subject: Privacy Act Guidance-Update,
identification of individual amployees. reimbursements for personal calls or dated May 24,1985) OMB suggested
and (1) linking them with specific calling for processing of administrative (without agreeing with the ruling) that
numbero; (2) linking them with specific offsets of pay pursuant to the agencies continue to make disclosure of
called numbers. provisions of the Debt Collection Act; these kinds of records without having
Notes that not all Privery Act records -To Freedom of Information Act received a FOIA request. We cautioned,
genereted as s result of call detail Officer and legal advisers.- ~ however, that agencies should be careful
programs would become a part of thin Some examples of disclosures that about making gratuitous releases of
system of records. Thus, investigative (b)(1) would not authorize are: aenaitive classes of Privacy Act records
records of the Office of We Inspector -To egenry personnel to identify and without having received a request for
General, persannel records re[lecting harass whistieblowers: them.
administrative or disciplinary actions, -To agency personnel who are merely Applying the Bartel ruling to call
finance and accounting records relating curiow to know who is calling whom. detail information, there appear to be
to cost attribution and recoveries, and ? Section (b)(2). "Required under three distinct categories of records
the like, that are generated from call Section 552 of this title." information ~ which could be considered for release
detail programs might be filed in .may be dLcloeed both inside and under section (b)(2):
appropriate existing systems and outside the agency to the extent that the -Records which clearly fall into the
subjected to their particular disclosure/ disclosure would be required by the 'public domain" category. We suggest
safeguarding provisions. In other Freedom of Information Act. Prior to the that these would be releasable either
instances, records (name and telephone ruling of the Court of Appeals for the at the agency's initiation or in
number, for example] may be common D.C. Circuit in Bartel v. FAA, 725 F.2d response to a FOIA request: The
to the call detail system and other 1403 (D.C. Cir. ]984), longstanding former because they ere of the
systems. agency practices and OMB "traditionally released" class; the
To help the agencies in its ~ Interpretation treated this section es latter, because no FO[A exemption
construction, we offer a model system permitting agencies to initiate disolouure would prevent their disclosure. An
notice in Appendix L of material that they would be example would be the names and
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
 Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/07/23 :CIA-RDP87-000588000400070009-6
Federal Register /Vol. 51, No. !00 / Ptiday, May t3, I888 ?/ Notices
e
s o o rtes actions taken as y , ems o records documenting an
a consequence of investigations o[ indrviduel'e responsibility for unofficial
abuses of the telephone system. We long distance calls as part of the bad
suggest that agencies should be very debt diacloanre. For this reason, the
cautious about initiating disclosure of model system notice at Appendix I
these records without receiving a contains a statement identifying the
F
app es ut which contour sensitive t rs poearble that agencies will wish to management inspections under the
information, e.g., records which reflect disclose information from call detail authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 29013: 131
the result f ff I a
t f
au Dazed crvrl or cnmural law t (set OMB Gurdelrnee on the Debt Administration and the National
enforcement activity. Collection Act, published in the Federal Archives end Records Administration
-Records for which no FOiA exemption Register on April 11, 1tt83 (48 FR 15558). who are conducting records
l; b I '
office telephone numbers of agency disclosure to the Departrnent of fileal and at (insert component
employees. These are generelly ]ustice?to prosecute an egregious locations).
considered public information abuser of an agency's long distance
(obviously there may be a.oeptiona. telecommunications system. This Categories ojlndividuols Covered by
[or investigative and intelligence disclosure is functionally compatible the System:
organizations), and the only since one of the purposes of the Agency employees who make long
applicable FOIA exemption, (b)(t3), tha system is to idea ' abusers end
personal privacy exam lion, would ~ distance calls and individuals who
p subject them to administrative or legal received telephone calla placed from
not apply. Thus, disclosures of en consequences.
employee's name and office telephone aB~cy telepbones.
number would be appropriate under as well as other urea thot on neiaesaory Categories of Records in the S stem:
Privacy Act section (b)(Z). and proper. y
-Records which could be withheld -For example, routine use (2) in the Records relating to use of the agency
under an applicable FOIA exemption model notice authorizes disclosure to telephones to place long distance calls,
and which, therefore, would not be representatives of the Genteel records indicating assignment of
required to be released. These could Services Admfniatretion or the telephone numbers to employees;
be, for example, records which National Archives and Records - records relating to location of
contain sensitive information relating Administration who ate conducting telephones.
tb ongoing investigative or personnel records management inspections Authority for Maintenance of the
matters ouch as records relating to the pm'auant to a specific etetutory System:
investigation of an employee for charter. Their purpose is fn no way
abuse of the agency's long distance functionally equivalent to the purpose (Cite appropriate agency
telephone system. Such records could for which the system was established; "housekeeping" statute authorizing the
reasonably be withheld under FOIA it is, however, clearly necessary and agency head to create, collect and keep
exemption (b)(t3) and, therefore, would .Proper. such records as are necessary to
not be releasable under section (b)(2) 'Section (b)(12).'To a conaamer manage the agency).
of the Privacy Act. An agency would reporting agency."'I'his disclosure Routine Uses o Records Molntoined in
not release these kinds of records exception wraa added to the origiunal I! the System: j
either at its own initiative or in by the Debt Collection Act of 19112. It
response to a FOIA request. It should authorizes agencies to disclose bad debt Records and date may be disclosed,
be noted, however, that such records information to credit bnreeus. Before as is necessary, (1) to Members of
might be released Hader other sections doing ao, however, agencies moat Congress to respond to inquiries made
of the Act, such as (b)(3), "fora complete a series of due process steps on behalf of individual constituents that
. routine use," or (b)[7) at the request of designed to validate the debt and to are record subjects; (2) to
th head of an agency for an 1 ~~ the individual the chance to iepay representatives of the General Services
OIA request since they appear do be system as one from which such
o[ the category of resords that diacloeuree can be made.
concerned the Bartel court. Eves with 7. Contact iebint for Guidance.
will be used for a purpose that is u.o, This b e proposed notice; agencies
compatible with the purpose for which ,should modify it ae approprieta.
the information was originally collected System Name:
71re concept of campatib7ity
coarprisee both fauret