Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · REGISTER · 2006-03-07 · Department of Justice · Rules and Regulations

Rules and Regulations. Final rule

753 words·~3 min read·/register/2006/03/07/06-2115

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

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 28 CFR Part 16 [AAG/A Order No. 003-2006] Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation AGENCY: Department of Justice. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Department of Justice, Tax Division, is amending 28 CFR part 16 to exempt a newly revised Privacy Act system of records entitled “Files of Applicants For Attorney and Non-Attorney Positions with the Tax Division, Justice/TAX-003,” as described in today's notice section of the **Federal Register** , from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (d)(1).
The exemptions will be applied only to the extent that information in a record is subject to exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5). The exemptions are necessary to protect the confidentiality of employment records. The Department also is deleting as obsolete provisions exempting two former Tax Division systems of records: “Freedom of Information/Privacy Act Request Files, Justice/TAX-004;” and “Tax Division Special Project Files, Justice/TAX-005.” The records in TAX-004 are now covered by a Departmentwide system notice, “Freedom of Information Act, Privacy Act, and Mandatory Declassification Review Requests and Administrative Appeals, DOJ-004”.
The relevant records in TAX-005 are now part of the revised system entitled “Criminal Tax Case Files, Special Project Files, Docket Cards, and Associated Records, Justice/TAX-001.” DATES: *Effective Date:* This final rule is effective March 7, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Cahill,
(202)307-1823. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 16, 2005 (70 FR 69486), a proposed rule was published in the **Federal Register** with an invitation to comment. Based on suggestions received, the Department is eliminating the reference to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) as a basis for exemption, and is removing the exemption from 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(1). This rule relates to individuals rather than small business entities. Nevertheless, pursuant to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 16 Administrative Practices and Procedures, Courts, Freedom of Information, Sunshine Act and Privacy. Pursuant to the authority vested in the Attorney General by 5 U.S.C. 552a and delegated to me by Attorney General Order No. 793-78, 28 CFR part 16 is amended as follows: PART 16—PRODUCTION OR DISCLOSURE OF MATERIAL OR INFORMATION 1. The authority for part 16 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a, 552b(g), and 553; 18 U.S.C. 4203(a)(1); 28 U.S.C. 509, 510, 534; 31 U.S.C. 3717, and 9701. 2. Section 16.93 is amended by: a. Removing the first sentence of paragraph (a)(2); b. Revising paragraph
(b)introductory text; c. Revising paragraphs
(e)and (f). Therefore, amend the section to read as follows: § 16.93 Exemption of Tax Division Systems—limited access.
(b)The system of records listed under paragraph (a)(1) of this section is exempted for the reasons set forth below, from the following provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a:
(e)The following system of records is exempt from subsections (c)(3) and (d)(1) of the Privacy Act pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5): Files of Applicants for Attorney and Non-Attorney Positions with the Tax Division, Justice/TAX-003. These exemptions apply only to the extent that information in a record is subject to exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5).
(f)Exemption from the particular subsections is justified for the following reasons:
(1)From subsection (c)(3) because an accounting could reveal the identity of confidential sources and result in an unwarranted invasion of the privacy of others. Many persons are contacted who, without an assurance of anonymity, refuse to provide information concerning an applicant for a position with the Tax Division. Disclosure of an accounting could reveal the identity of a source of information and constitutes a breach of the promise of confidentiality by the Tax Division. This would result in the reduction in the free flow of information vital to a determination of an applicant's qualifications and suitability for federal employment.
(2)From subsection (d)(1) because disclosure of records in the system could reveal the identity of confidential sources and result in an unwarranted invasion of the privacy of others. Many persons are contacted who, without an assurance of anonymity, refuse to provide information concerning an applicant for a Tax Division position. Access could reveal the identity of the source of the information and constitute a breach of the promise of confidentiality on the part of the Tax Division. Such breaches ultimately would restrict the free flow of information vital to a determination of an applicant's qualifications and suitability. Dated: February 27, 2006. Paul R. Corts, Assistant Attorney General for Administration. [FR Doc. 06-2115 Filed 3-6-06; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 4
3 references not yet in our index
  • 28 CFR 16
  • 5 USC 601-612
  • 18 USC 4203(a)(1)
Citation graph
cites case law
Rules and Regulations
Final rule
Cite28 CFR 16
Cite5 USC 601-612
Cite18 USC 4203(a)(1)
Cites 7Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.