Overview
Title
Privacy Act of 1974; Systems of Records
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is making small changes to the way they organize and describe information they keep about people, like updating details to make them clearer, but the way they store information stays the same. They're also asking people to let them know what they think about these changes by April 18, 2025.
Summary AI
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is updating 13 of its systems of records under the Privacy Act of 1974. These updates involve minor administrative changes like updating authorities, retention schedules, and system managers to ensure clarity and accuracy. Importantly, these modifications do not alter the systems themselves. The public is invited to comment on these revisions by April 18, 2025.
Abstract
Pursuant to the Privacy Act of 1974 and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-108, to ensure the system of records notices remain accurate, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff reviews each notice on a periodic basis. As a result of this review, the NRC is republishing 13 of its system of records notices with minor corrective, clarifying, and administrative changes. These minor modifications include updating authorities, system managers, retention schedules, and various other minor updates, as well as edits that are intended to improve clarity of the notices but that are not intended to modify the systems themselves. None of the modifications the NRC is making meet the threshold criteria established by OMB for either a new or altered system of records.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
In this document, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) announces updates to 13 of its systems of records under the Privacy Act of 1974. Predominantly, these updates relate to minor corrective, clarifying, and administrative changes, aiming to ensure that the records are accurate and clear. These changes include updating the authorities, system managers, and retention schedules associated with the records. It's crucial to note that none of these modifications are substantial enough to necessitate the creation of a new system or an alteration of an existing one. The NRC invites public comments on these changes up until April 18, 2025.
Significant Issues or Concerns
The document presents a number of potential challenges for a general audience:
Complex Language and Legal References: The document contains technical and specialized information pertaining to the NRC's systems of records, often referencing complex legal statutes like "5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(6)." Such references can be difficult to understand without a background in law or records management.
Navigation and Clarity Issues: There are repeated mentions of "Notification procedures" or other technical steps without providing clear instructions, which may confuse those unfamiliar with the NRC's protocols or federal privacy laws.
Lack of Detailed Context: Frequently, the document refers to various Federal Regulations and legal acts, such as the "OMB Circular No. A-108" and the "Rehabilitation Act of 1973," without offering summaries or explanations, making it less accessible to non-experts.
Public Impact
This document represents an administrative refresh of the existing systems of records without altering their core functions. For the general public, the updates may seem relatively inconsequential, but they do ensure that the records remain up-to-date and organized under clear, modern governance frameworks. Public engagement through a comment period is a positive practice, although the high level of complexity might deter broad participation.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
NRC Employees and Contractors: The changes directly affect NRC employees and contractors as they apply to records like employee disciplinary actions and freedom of information requests. Updated policies can enhance data protection and procedural clarity for those handling such records.
Legal and Privacy Experts: These updates may be of particular interest to experts in legal, privacy, and records management fields who seek to ensure compliance with the latest standards and practices. The minor nature of changes signifies stability in operations without major disruptions.
General Public: While the implications for the broader public may appear limited, these updates secure transparency and accountability in federal record-keeping practices. Ensuring accurate and reliable record systems is vital for structured public access and safeguarding privacy rights.
In summary, while the document presents intricate legal and administrative updates that align with the Privacy Act of 1974, it maintains the status quo of existing systems without significant transformations. Although ensuring precise and concise management of records, the document's complexity may limit engagement from the general public beyond legal and regulatory experts.
Issues
• The document contains highly technical and specialized information regarding systems of records maintained by the NRC, which may be challenging for individuals without expertise in records management or federal privacy regulations to fully comprehend.
• There is repeated use of complex legal references, such as '5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(6)', which could be difficult for laypersons to understand without further explanation or context.
• Specific procedures for accessing and contesting records are mentioned, such as 'Notification procedures,' without detailed steps provided, potentially causing confusion for individuals unfamiliar with NRC protocols.
• Multiple references to Federal Regulations and acts, such as 'OMB Circular No. A-108' and 'Rehabilitation Act of 1973,' are included without summaries or explanations, which might render the document less accessible for those unfamiliar with these documents.
• The document is lengthy, with multiple sections and sub-sections which may discourage thorough reading by the general public, potentially impacting transparency and engagement.
• The language used in detailing the routine uses of records under each system name can be dense, with long lists of clauses and cross-references, possibly making it hard for readers to discern key points.
• Reference to 'OMB threshold criteria' and adjustments that do not require a new or altered system notice could benefit from further clarity about what these criteria entail, to assist readers in understanding implications for changes to the system of records.