[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 71 (Thursday, April 13, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18784-18785]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9104]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

28 CFR Part 16

[AAG/A Order No. 99-95]


Exemption of System of Records Under the Privacy Act

AGENCY: Department of Justice.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Justice (DOJ), U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) 
proposes to amend its Privacy Act regulations. The USMS proposes to 
exempt a new Privacy Act system of records entitled, ``Joint Automated 
Bookings Stations (JABS), USM-014'' from subsections (c) (3) and (4), 
(d), (e) (1), (2), and (3), (e)(5), (e)(8) and (g) of the Privacy Act 
(5 U.S.C. 552a). Information in this system of records relates to 
matters of law enforcement, and the exemptions are necessary to avoid 
interference with law enforcement responsibilities and to protect the 
privacy of third parties. The reasons for the exemptions are set forth 
in the text below.

DATES: Submit any comments by May 15, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Address all comments to Patricia E. Neely, Staff Assistant, 
Systems Policy Staff, Information Resources Management, Justice 
Management Division, Department of Justice, Washington, DC (Room 850, 
WCTR Bldg.).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patricia E. Neely, (202) 616-0718.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the notice section of today's Federal 
Register, the USMS provides a description of this system of records.
    This order relates to individuals rather than small business 
entities. Nevertheless, pursuant to the requirements of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, it is hereby stated that the order 
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 Procedure, Courts, Freedom of 
Information Act, Government in the Sunshine Act, and the Privacy Act.

    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, 
it is proposed to amend 28 CFR part 16, as set forth below.


[[Page 18785]]

    Dated: March 30, 1995.
Stephen R. Colgate,
Assistant Attorney General for Administration.

    1. The authority for part 16 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a, 552b(g), 553; 18 U.S.C. 4203 
(a)(1); 28 U.S.C. 509, 510, 534; 31 U.S.C. 3717, 9701.

    2. It is proposed to amend 28 CFR 16.101 by redesignating paragraph 
(s) as paragraph (u), and adding new paragraphs (s) and (t) as set 
forth below.


Sec. 16.101  Exemption of U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) Systems--Limited 
Access, as indicated.

* * * * *
    (s) The following system of records is exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c) 
(3) and (4), (d), (e) (1), (2), (3), (e)(5) and (e)(8) and (g):

Joint Automated Booking Stations, Justice/USM-014

    (t) 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). 
Where compliance would not interfere with or adversely affect the law 
enforcement process, the USMS may waive the exemptions, either 
partially or totally. Exemption from the particular subsections are 
justified for the following reasons:
    (1) From subsections (c)(3) and (d) to the extent that access to 
records in this system of records may impede or interfere with law 
enforcement efforts, result in the disclosure of information that would 
constitute an unwarranted invasion of the personal privacy of 
collateral record subjects or other third parties, and/or jeopardize 
the health and/or safety of third parties.
    (2) Where access to certain records may be appropriate, exemption 
from the amendment provisions of subsection (d)(2) is necessary to the 
extent that the necessary and appropriate justification, together with 
proof of record inaccuracy, is not provided, and/or to the extent that 
numerous, frivolous requests to amend could impose an impossible 
administrative burden by requiring agencies to continuously review 
booking and arrest data, much of which is collected from the arrestee 
during the arrest.
    (3) From subsection (e)(1) to the extent that is necessary to 
retain all information in order not to impede, compromise, or interfere 
with law enforcement efforts, e.g., where the significance of the 
information may not be readily determined and/or where such information 
may provide leads or assistance to Federal and other law enforcement 
agencies in discharging their law enforcement responsibilities.

    (4) From subsection (e)(2) because, in some instances,the 
application of this provision would present a serious impediment to law 
enforcement since it may be necessary to obtain and verify information 
from a variety of sources other than the record subject to ensure 
safekeeping, security, and effective law enforcement. For example, it 
may be necessary that medical and psychiatric personnel provide 
information regarding the subject's behavior, physical health, or 
mental stability, etc. to ensure proper care while in custody, or it 
may be necessary to obtain information from a case agent or the court 
to ensure proper disposition of the subject individual.

    (5) From subsection (e)(3) because the requirement that agencies 
inform each individual whom it asks to supply information of such 
information as is required by subsection (e)(3) may, in some cases, 
impede the information gathering process or otherwise interfere with or 
compromise law enforcement efforts, e.g., the subject may deliberately 
withhold information, or give erroneous information.

    (6) From subsection (e)(5) 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. With the 
passage of time, seemingly irrelevant or untimely information may 
acquire new significance and the accuracy of such information can only 
be determined in a court of law. The restrictions imposed by subsection 
(e)(5) would restrict the ability to collect information for law 
enforcement purposes and may prevent the eventual development of the 
necessary criminal intelligence or otherwise impede effective law 
enforcement.

    (7) From subsection (e)(8) to the extent that such notice may 
impede, interfere with, or otherwise compromise law enforcement and 
security efforts.

    (8) From subsection (g) to the extent that this system is exempt 
from the access and amendment provisions of subsection (d).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 95-9104 Filed 4-12-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-01-M