§ 16.73 - Exemption of Office of Legal Policy Systems.

§ 16.73 Exemption of Office of Legal Policy System - limited access.

Cross Reference

Link to an amendment published at 86 FR 54369, Oct. 1, 2021.

Systems.

(a) The following Judicial Nominations Files (JUSTICE/OLP-002) system of records is exempt from 5 U.S.C 552a (d)(1), (2subsections (c)(3); (d); (e)(1), (3e) and (4); (eG), (1H), and (2), (e)(4)(G) and (H), (eI); and (f) of the Privacy Act, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1), (k)(2), (k)(5); , and (gk): (

1) Freedom of Information and Privacy Appeals Index (JUSTICE/OLP-001). These exemptions

6). The exemptions in this paragraph (a) apply only to the extent that information in this system of records is subject to an exemption, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(

j)(2), (k)(2) and (k)(5)

k). Where compliance would not appear to interfere with or adversely affect the Office of Legal Policy's (OLP's) processes, OLP may waive the applicable exemption.

(b) Exemptions from the particular subsections in paragraph (a) of this section are justified for the following reasons:

(1) From subsections subsection (dc)(1), (2), (3), and (4) to the extent that information in this record system relates to official Federal investigations and matters of law enforcement. Individual access to these records might compromise ongoing investigations, reveal confidential informants or constitute unwarranted invasions of the personal privacy of third parties who are involved in a certain investigation. Amendment of the records would interfere with ongoing criminal law enforcement proceedings and impose an impossible administrative burden by requiring criminal investigations to be continuously reinvestigated.

(2) From subsections (e)(1) and (5) because in the course of law enforcement investigations, information may occasionally be obtained or introduced the accuracy of which is unclear or which is not 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 criminal activity. Moreover, it would impede the specific investigative process if it were necessary to assure the relevance, accuracy, timeliness, and completeness of all information obtained.

(3) From subsection (e)(2) because in a law enforcement investigation the requirement that information be collected to the greatest extent possible from the subject individual would present a serious impediment to law enforcement in that the subject of the investigation would be informed of the existence of the investigation and would therefore be able to avoid detection, apprehension, or legal obligations or duties.

(4) From subsections (e)(4)(G) and (H) because this system is exempt from the access provisions of subsection (d) pursuant to subsections (j) and (k) of the Privacy Act.

(5) From subsection (g) because this system is exempt from the access provisions of subsection (d) pursuant to subsections (j) and (k) of the Privacy Act.

(c) The following system of records is exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a(d)(1) and (e)(1):

(1) U.S. Judges Records System (JUSTICE/OLP-002).

These exemptions apply to the extent that information in this system is subject to exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5).

(d) Exemptions from the particular subsections are justified for the following reasons:

(1) From subsection (d)(1) because many persons are contracted

requirement that an accounting be made available to the named subject of a record, because release of disclosure accountings could alert the subject of an investigation and/or evaluation to the extent of an investigation and/or evaluation. Such a disclosure could also reveal investigative interests by not only OLP, but also other recipient agencies or components. Since release of such information to the subjects of an investigation would provide them with significant information concerning the nature of the investigation and/or evaluation, release could result in the destruction of documentary evidence, improper influencing of witnesses, endangerment of the physical safety of confidential sources, witnesses, and law enforcement personnel, the fabrication of testimony, and other activities that could impede or compromise the investigation and/or evaluation. In addition, providing the individual an accounting for each disclosure could result in the release of properly classified information which would compromise the national defense or disrupt foreign policy.

(2) From subsection (d), the access and amendment provisions, because many persons are contacted who, without an assurance of anonymity, refuse to provide information concerning

a candidate for a judgeship

the subject of an investigation and/or evaluation. Access could reveal the identity of the source of the information and constitute a breach of the promised confidentiality on the part of the Department. Such breaches ultimately would restrict the free flow of information vital to the determination of a candidate's qualifications and suitability, among other determinations.

(2

The Department also relies on certain examination materials to assess and evaluate an individual's qualifications for an applicable position. Access and/or amendment to such material could reveal information about the examination and vetting process and could compromise its objectivity and/or fairness. Access and/or amendment to such material could also inappropriately advantage future candidates with knowledge of the examination materials. Finally, providing the individual access or amendment rights could result in the release of properly classified information which would compromise the national defense or disrupt foreign policy.

(3) From subsection (e)(1), because in the collection of information for investigative and evaluative purposes, it is impossible to determine in advance what exact information may be of assistance in determining the qualifications and suitability of

a candidate

the subject of an investigation and/or evaluation. Information which may seem irrelevant, when combined with other seemingly irrelevant information, can on occasion provide a composite picture of a candidate which assists in determining whether that candidate should be nominated for appointment.

(e) The following system of records is exempt from U.S.C. 552a(c) (3) and (4); (d); (e)(1), (2) and (3), (e)(4)(G) and (H) (e)(5); and (g):

(1) General Files System of the Office of Legal Policy (JUSTICE/OLP-003).

These exemptions apply only to the extent that information in the system is subject to exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(5).

(f) Exemptions from the particular subsections are justified for the following reasons:

(1) From subsection (c)(3) because making available to a record subject the accounting of disclosures from records concerning him/her would reveal investigative interest on the part of the Department as well as the recipient agency. This would permit record subjects to impede the investigation, e.g., destroy evidence, intimidate potential witnesses, or flee the area to avoid inquiries or apprehension by law enforcement personnel.

(2) From subsection (c)(4) because this system is exempt from the access provisions of subsection (d) pursuant to subsections (j) and (k) of the Privacy Act.

(3) From subsection (d) because the records contained in this system relate to official Federal investigations. Individual access to these records might compromise ongoing investigations, reveal confidential informants, or constitute unwarranted invasions of the personal privacy of third parties who are involved in a certain investigation. Amendment of records would interfere with ongoing criminal law enforcement proceedings and impose an impossible administrative burden by requiring criminal investigations to be continuously reinvestigated.

(4) From subsections (e) (1) and (5) because in the course of law enforcement investigations, information may occasionally be obtained or introduced the accuracy of which is unclear or which is not strictly relevant or necessary to a specific investigation. In the interests of effective law enforcement, it is appropriate to retain all information since it may aid in establishing patterns of criminal activity. Moreover, it would impede the specific investigation process if it were necessary to assure the relevance, accuracy, timeliness and completeness of all information obtained.

(5) From subsections (e)(2) because in a law enforcement investigation the requirement that information be collected to the greatest extent possible from the subject individual would present a serious impediment to law enforcement in that the subject of the investigation would be informed of the existence of the investigation and would therefore be able to avoid detection, apprehension, or legal obligations and duties.

(6) From subsection (e)(3) because to comply with the requirements of this subsection during the course of an investigation could impede the information gathering process, thus hampering the investigation.

(7) From

Relevance and necessity are questions of judgment and timing, and it is only after the information is evaluated that the relevance and necessity of such information can be established. In interviewing individuals or obtaining other forms of information during OLP processes, information may be supplied to OLP which relates to matters incidental to the primary purpose of OLP's processes, but also relate to matters under the investigative jurisdiction of another agency. Such information cannot readily be segregated.

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

because this system is exempt from the access provisions of subsection (d) pursuant to subsections (j) and (k) of the Privacy Act. (8) From subsection (g)

, and subsection (f), because this system is exempt from the access and amendment provisions of subsection (d)

pursuant to subsections

.

(

j) and (k) of the Privacy Act. (g) The following

c) The General Files System of the Office of Legal Policy (JUSTICE/OLP-003) system of records is exempt from

5 U.S.C.

subsections 552a(c)(3) and (4); (d); (e)(1), (2) and (3), (e)(4)(G) and (H), and (e)(5); and (g)

:

(1) Declassification Review System (JUSTICE/OLP-004).

These exemptions

of the Privacy Act, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), (k)(1), (k)(2) and (k)(5). The exemptions in this paragraph (c) apply only to the extent that information in this system is subject to exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(j)

(2)

, (k)

(1), (k)(2), and (k)(5). (h

. Where compliance would not appear to interfere with or adversely affect OLP's processes, the applicable exemption may be waived by OLP.

(d) Exemptions from the particular subsections in paragraph (c) of this section are justified for the following reasons:

(1) From subsection (c)(3) because making available to a record subject the accounting of disclosures from records concerning him/her would reveal investigative interest on the part of the Department

of Justice

as well as the recipient agency. This would permit record subjects to impede the investigation, e.g., destroy evidence, intimidate potential witnesses, or flee the area to avoid inquiries or apprehension by law enforcement personnel.

(2) From subsection (c)(4) because this system is exempt from the access provisions of subsection (d) pursuant to subsections (j) and (k) of the Privacy Act.

(3) From subsection (d)

to the extent that information

because the records contained in this

record

system

relates

relate to official Federal investigations

and matters of law enforcement and/or is properly classified pursuant to E

.

O. 12356.

Individual access to these records might compromise ongoing investigations, reveal confidential

sources

informants, or constitute unwarranted invasions of the personal privacy of third parties who are involved in a certain investigation

, or jeopardize national security or foreign policy interests

. Amendment of

the

records would interfere with ongoing criminal law enforcement proceedings and impose an impossible administrative burden by requiring criminal investigations to be continuously reinvestigated.

(4) From subsections (e)(1) and (5) because in the course of law enforcement investigations, information may occasionally be obtained or introduced the accuracy of which is unclear or which is not strictly relevant or necessary to a specific investigation. In the interests of effective law enforcement, it is appropriate to retain all information

which

since it may aid in establishing patterns of criminal activity. Moreover, it would impede the specific

investigative

investigation process if it were necessary to assure the relevance, accuracy, timeliness

,

and completeness of all information obtained.

(5) From

subsection

subsections (e)(2) because in a law enforcement investigation the requirement that information be collected to the greatest extent possible from the subject individual would present a serious impediment to law enforcement in that the subject of the investigation would be informed of the existence of the investigation and would therefore be able to avoid detection, apprehension, or legal obligations

or

and duties.

(6) From subsection (e)(3) because to comply with the requirements of this subsection during the course of an investigation could impede the information gathering process, thus hampering the investigation.

(7) From subsections (e)(4)(G) and (H)

, and (

because this system is exempt from the access provisions of subsection (d) pursuant to subsections (j) and (k) of the Privacy Act.

(8) From subsection (g) because this system is exempt from the access and amendment provisions of subsection (d) pursuant to subsections (j) and (k) of the Privacy Act.

[Order No. 34009-85, 51 FR 754, Jan. 8, 1986. Redesignated by Order No. 6-86, 51 FR 15476, Apr. 24, 1986, and further redesignated and amended by Order No. 19-86, 51 FR 39373, Oct. 28, 19862021, 86 FR 54369, Oct. 1, 2021]