56422 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Administration for Children and 

Families 

Office of Child Support Enforcement 

45 CFR Parts 302, 303, and 307 

RIN 0970–AC01 

State Parent Locator Service; 

Safeguarding Child Support 

Information 

AGENCY: Office of Child Support 

Enforcement (OCSE), Administration for 

Children and Families (ACF), 

Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Personal Responsibility 

and Work Opportunity Reconciliation 

Act of 1996 (PRWORA) created and 

expanded State and Federal title IV–D 

child support enforcement databases 

and significantly enhanced access to 

information for title IV–D child support 

purposes. States are moving toward 

integrated service delivery and 

developing enterprise architecture 

initiatives to link their program 

databases. This final rule prescribes 

requirements for: State Parent Locator 

Service responses to authorized location 

requests; and State IV–D program 

safeguarding of confidential information 

and authorized disclosures of this 

information. This rule restricts the use 

of confidential data and information to 

child support purposes, with exceptions 

for certain disclosures permitted by 

statute. 

DATES: This rule is effective March 23, 

2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Yvette Hilderson Riddick, Policy and 

Automation Liaison, OCSE, 202–401– 

4885, e-mail: yvetteriddick@acf.hhs.gov. 

Deaf and hearing-impaired individuals 

may call the Federal Dual Party Relay 

Service at 1–800–877–8339 between 8 

a.m. and 7 p.m. eastern time. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Statutory Authority 

II. Summary Description of Regulatory 

Provisions 

A. State Parent Locator Service 

B. Safeguarding and Disclosure of 

Confidential Information 

III. Section-by-Section Discussion of 

Comments 

IV. Regulatory Review 

A. Paperwork Reduction Act 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

C. Regulatory Impact Analysis 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

E. Congressional Review 

F. Assessment of Federal Regulations and 

Policies on Families 

G. Executive Order 13132 

I. Statutory Authority 

This final regulation is published 

under the authority granted to the 

Secretary of HHS (Secretary) by section 

1102 of the Social Security Act (the 

Act), 42 U.S.C. 1302. Section 1102 

authorizes the Secretary to publish 

regulations that may be necessary for 

the efficient administration of the 

functions for which he is responsible 

under the Act. 

The provisions of this final rule 

pertaining to the Federal Parent Locator 

Service (PLS) implement section 453 of 

the Act, 42 U.S.C. 653. Section 453 

requires the Secretary to establish and 

conduct a Federal PLS to obtain and 

transmit specified information to 

authorized persons for purposes of 

establishing parentage; establishing, 

modifying, or enforcing child support 

obligations; and enforcing any Federal 

or State law with respect to a parental 

kidnapping; or making or enforcing a 

child custody or visitation 

determination, as described in section 

463 of the Act. It authorizes the 

Secretary to use the services of State 

entities to carry out these functions. 

The provisions relating to the State 

PLS implement section 454(8) of the 

Act, 42 U.S.C. 654(8), which requires 

each State plan for child support 

enforcement to provide that the State 

will: (1) Establish a service to locate 

parents utilizing all sources of 

information and available records; and 

the Federal PLS established under 

section 453; and (2) shall subject to the 

privacy safeguards in section 454(26) of 

the Act, 42 U.S.C. 654(26), disclose only 

the information described in sections 

453 and 463 of the Act to the authorized 

persons specified in those sections. 

The provisions relating to the States’ 

computerized support enforcement 

systems implement section 454A of the 

Act, 42 U.S.C. 654a, which requires 

States’ systems to perform such 

functions as the Secretary may specify 

relating to management of the State title 

IV–D program. Additionally, as stated in 

section 454A(f) of the Act, the State 

shall use the statewide automated 

system to extract information from, to 

share and compare information with, 

and to receive information from, other 

data bases and information necessary to 

enable the State agency (or the Secretary 

or other State or Federal agencies) to 

carry out the Child Support 

Enforcement program under title IV–D 

of the Act, and other programs 

designated by the Secretary. 

In addition, the provisions pertaining 

to safeguarding of information 

implement section 454(26) of the Act, 

which requires the State IV–D program 

to have in effect safeguards, applicable 

to all confidential information handled 

by the State agency, that are designed to 

protect the privacy rights of the parties. 

Nothing in this rule is meant to prevent 

the appropriate use of administrative 

data for program oversight, 

management, and research. 

II. Summary Description of Regulatory 

Provisions 

The following is a summary of the 

regulatory provisions included in this 

final rule. The Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM) was published in 

the Federal Register on October 14, 

2005 (70 FR 60038). The NPRM was 

organized into two major sections. 

Section 1: State Parent Locator Service 

discussed amendments to the proposed 

regulations on locating individuals and 

their assets in response to authorized 

location requests. Affected regulations 

include §§ 302.35, 303.3, 303.20, and 

303.70. Section 2: Safeguarding and 

Disclosure of Confidential Information 

discussed new regulations on 

safeguarding and disclosure of 

confidential information, § 303.21 and 

amendments to the regulation on 

security and confidentiality of 

information in computerized support 

enforcement systems, § 307.13. 

The Section-by-Section Discussion of 

Comments (Section III) provides a 

detailed listing of the comments and 

responses. Many commenters asked for 

points of clarification rather than for 

change of language in the regulation. 

There were some comments, however, 

that brought about regulatory language 

changes in the final rule. Specifically, 

major changes include: 

In § 303.21(a) we deleted the last 

sentence ‘‘The amount of support 

ordered and the amount of a support 

collection are not considered 

confidential information for purposes of 

this section.’’ Commenters were 

concerned that this language may be 

interpreted as IV–D payment records 

could be made available to requestors 

not associated with the case who may 

want the information for purposes not 

related to child support. 

In response to comments, we deleted 

paragraph (1) of § 303.21(d), which in 

the NPRM authorized disclosure of 

confidential information to the 

individual to whom the information 

pertains. To the extent that an 

individual is requesting information 

about himself/herself in the IV–D 

agency’s files for a IV–D program 

purpose, the information may be 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 56423 

disclosed under paragraph (c), General 

rule. We also deleted under paragraph 

(e) Safeguards, that ‘‘safeguards shall 

prohibit disclosure to any committee or 

legislative body (Federal, State, or local) 

of any confidential information, unless 

authorized by the individual as 

specified in paragraph (d) of this 

section.’’ To the extent that an 

individual in a IV–D case submits a 

request to a legislator or legislative body 

concerning his or her IV–D case, the IV– 

D agency may disclose the information 

necessary for the response because the 

inquiry relates to the administration of 

the IV–D program and is authorized 

under paragraph (c). 

We revised § 303.21(d)(2)(ii) and (iii) 

and relocated it to § 303.21(d)(1). 

Section 454A of the Act only permits 

the disclosure of information for nonIV–D purposes to State agencies of 

designated programs where the 

information is necessary to carry out a 

State agency function under that 

program. Therefore, we have relocated 

these disclosures to clarify that they are 

encompassed within this authority 

specified in § 303.21(d)(1). In paragraph 

(2), we restricted disclosure of 

information for income and eligibility 

verification purposes under sections 

453A and 1137 of the Act to SDNH 

information. 

We added language to § 303.21(e) that 

refers to family violence indicator 

requirements under § 307.11(f)(1)(x). 

Commenters thought we should add 

language regarding the family violence 

indicator which is an additional privacy 

safeguard for family violence victims. 

We also changed § 307.13(a) of the 

NPRM by deleting paragraph (4). It 

referred to welfare-to-work, a grant 

program that no longer exists. We 

redesignated paragraph (a)(5) as 

paragraph (a)(4) and revised the 

language for clarity. As revised, it 

requires written policies that limit 

disclosure outside the IV–D program of 

National Directory of New Hire, Federal 

Case Registry and Internal Revenue 

Service (IRS) information from the 

computerized support enforcement 

system. The regulation sets forth the 

circumstances when information may be 

disclosed to IV–A, IV–B, and IV–E 

agencies and when IRS information may 

be disclosed. As revised, financial 

institution information cannot be shared 

outside the IV–D program. We made this 

change because of the language in 

section 469A(a) and (b) of the Act. 

These sections provide for non-liability 

for financial institutions when they 

disclose financial record information 

only for child support related purposes. 

Throughout the preamble and regulation 

we use ‘‘financial institution 

information’’ to refer to information 

covered by section 469A(a) and (b) of 

the Act. This information includes 

Multistate Financial Data Matches 

(MSFIDM) and State Financial Institute 

Data Matches (State FIDM). 

Some commenters found the charts 

confusing, especially Appendix A in 

Section I and Appendix A in Section 2. 

We reorganized the two previous charts 

into three charts: Appendix A, B, and C. 

In Appendix A we reordered the chart 

by displaying locate efforts first by 

person rather than by purpose. 

Appendix A illustrates authority for 

locating individuals through the State 

PLS. Appendix B illustrates authority 

for locating an individual sought in a 

child custody/visitation or parental 

kidnapping case. Appendix C illustrates 

authority for State IV–D agencies to 

release information to non-IV–D 

Federal, State, and Tribal Programs. 

These charts are included at the end of 

the preamble for illustrative purposes 

only. 

Section II. A. State Parent Locator 

Service (Sections 302.35, 303.3, 303.20, 

and 303.70) 

Section 302.35, State Parent Locator 

Service 

The previous regulation at § 302.35(a) 

contained a State plan requirement that 

the IV–D program shall establish a State 

Parent Locator Service (PLS) using: (1) 

All relevant sources of information and 

records available in the State, and in 

other States as appropriate; and (2) the 

Federal PLS of the Department of Health 

and Human Services. 

Paragraph (a) modifies the 

requirement for each State to 

‘‘establish’’ a State PLS, and instead 

requires each State to ‘‘maintain’’ a State 

PLS ‘‘to provide locate information to 

authorized persons for authorized 

purposes.’’ 

Section § 302.35(a)(1), covering IV–D 

agencies, cases and purposes, requires 

that the State PLS access ‘‘the Federal 

PLS and all relevant sources of 

information and records available in the 

State, and in other States as appropriate, 

for locating custodial parents, 

noncustodial parents, and children for 

IV–D purposes.’’ Paragraph (a)(2) 

addresses locate requests for authorized 

non-IV–D individuals and purposes. For 

purposes of this regulation, all requests 

under section 453(c)(3) of the Act are 

considered to be requests by non-IV–D 

individuals and purposes. This 

provision requires a IV–D program to 

access and release information 

authorized to be disclosed under section 

453(a)(2) of the Act from ‘‘the Federal 

PLS and, in accordance with State law, 

information from relevant in-state 

sources of information and records, as 

appropriate’’ to respond to locate 

requests from a non-IV–D entity or 

authorized individual specified in 

paragraph (c) and for authorized 

purposes specified in paragraph (d). 

For non-IV–D requests, under 

paragraph (a)(2), the State PLS will not 

access IRS information or financial 

institution information, which is 

available only to IV–D agencies and to 

a limited extent to their agents, under 

Federal statute. 

The previous regulation at paragraph 

(b) required that the IV–D agency must 

‘‘establish a central State PLS office and 

also may designate additional IV–D 

offices within the State to submit 

requests to the Federal PLS.’’ The 

amendment to § 302.35(b) removes 

mention of a State PLS ‘‘office.’’ It also 

requires the IV–D program to 

‘‘maintain’’ rather than ‘‘establish’’ a 

central State PLS. 

The previous § 302.35(c)(1) through 

(5) language specified the authorized 

persons and entities from whom the 

State PLS shall accept requests for 

locate information. The amendments to 

paragraph (c) strengthen the process by 

which authorized requestors obtain 

locate information through the State 

PLS, specifically with respect to 

requests from a resident parent, legal 

guardian, attorney, or agent of a non-IV– 

A child. 

Previously, § 302.35(c)(3) simply 

referred to the ‘‘resident parent, legal 

guardian, attorney, or agent of a child’’ 

in non-IV–A cases as authorized 

persons. The revised § 302.35(c)(3) 

makes it clear that the State PLS will 

accept locate requests from the resident 

parent, legal guardian, attorney or agent 

of a child who is not receiving 

assistance under title IV–A of the Act 

only if key requirements are met. The 

regulation requires the individual to: (i) 

Attest that the request is being made to 

obtain information on, or to facilitate 

the discovery of, any individual in 

accordance with section 453(a)(2) of the 

Act for the purpose of establishing 

parentage, establishing, setting the 

amount of, modifying, or enforcing 

child support obligations; (ii) attest that 

any information obtained through the 

Federal or State PLS will be used solely 

for these purposes and otherwise treated 

as confidential; (iii) provide evidence 

that the requestor is the parent, legal 

guardian, attorney, or agent of a child 

not receiving assistance under title IV– 

A of the Act, and if an agent of such a 

child, evidence of a valid contract that 

meets any requirements in State law or 

written policy for acting as an agent, 

and if a parent, attestation that he or she 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

56424 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

is the resident parent; and (iv) pay the 

Federal PLS fee required under section 

453(e)(2) of the Act and § 303.70(f)(2)(i), 

if the State does not pay the fee itself. 

The regulation also specifies that the 

State may charge a fee to cover its costs 

of processing these requests. A State’s 

fee must be as close to actual costs as 

possible, so as not to discourage 

requests to use the Federal PLS. See 

§§ 304.23(e) and 304.50(a). Paragraph 

(c)(4) simplifies the language regarding 

the use of the Federal PLS for parental 

kidnapping, child custody, or visitation 

cases. Paragraph (c)(5) rewords the 

previous language allowing locate 

requests from State title IV–B and title 

IV–E agencies. 

Previous paragraph (d) is redesignated 

as paragraph (e), as discussed below. A 

new paragraph (d) is added to specify 

the authorized purposes for which the 

State PLS and the Federal PLS may be 

used and the locate information that 

may be released for these purposes. 

Paragraph (d)(1) covers the purposes of 

establishing parentage and establishing, 

modifying, or enforcing child support. It 

also covers related authorized releases 

of information to locate an individual 

who has or may have parental rights 

with respect to the child. It pertains to 

IV–D and non-IV–D authorized persons 

and programs, including title IV–B and 

IV–E agencies. For IV–B/IV–E cases that 

are non-IV–D and other cases under 

(d)(1), wage information is authorized 

and the State PLS may provide asset 

and/or debt information from the 

Federal PLS. Paragraph (d)(2) covers the 

purposes of enforcing a State law with 

respect to the unlawful taking or 

restraint of a child or for making or 

enforcing child custody or visitation 

determination and the related 

authorized releases of information. 

Paragraph (e), requires privacy 

safeguards for Federal PLS information 

only. The amendment specifies at 

paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) that, subject to 

the requirements of this section and the 

privacy safeguards required under 

section 454(26) of the Act and the 

family violence indicators under section 

307.11(f)(1)(x), the State PLS shall 

disclose ‘‘Federal PLS information’’ 

described in sections 453 and 463 of the 

Act and ‘‘information from in-state 

locate.’’ An Appendix A has been added 

at the end of the preamble to show the 

linkages between authorizing statute, 

authorized purpose, authorized person 

or program, and authorized information. 

Section 303.3, Location of Noncustodial 

Parents in IV–D Cases 

Under the final rule, § 303.3 is retitled ‘‘Location of noncustodial parents 

in IV–D cases.’’ Under paragraph (a), 

location is defined to mean 

‘‘information concerning the physical 

whereabouts of the noncustodial parent, 

or the noncustodial parent’s 

employer(s), other sources of income or 

assets, as appropriate, which is 

sufficient and necessary to take the next 

appropriate action in a IV–D case.’’ 

The amendments to paragraph (b) 

clarify which location requirements 

apply to IV–D cases. Paragraph 303.3(b) 

requires the IV–D program to attempt to 

locate a noncustodial parent in a IV–D 

case or his or her sources of income 

and/or assets when location is needed to 

take necessary action. Paragraphs (b)(1) 

through (5) provide an extensive list of 

location sources that as discussed below 

are unchanged for the most part from 

the previous regulation. 

Paragraph (b)(3) no longer includes 

the words ‘‘including transmitting 

appropriate cases to the Federal PLS’’ 

because States now submit cases to the 

Federal Case Registry for automatic 

matching with the National Directory of 

New Hires for locate purposes. 

The previous regulation at paragraph 

(b)(4) required the IV–D program to 

‘‘Refer appropriate cases to the IV–D 

program of any other State, in 

accordance with the requirements of 

§ 303.7 of this part.’’ The amendment 

inserts the word ‘‘IV–D’’ before the word 

‘‘cases’’ to clarify that the IV–D program 

of State 1 may refer only IV–D cases to 

the IV–D program of State 2. 

New paragraph (b)(6) draws a direct 

link between the IV–D program’s duty to 

locate noncustodial parents and the 

duty to safeguard information. The 

language incorporates by reference both 

the existing statutory requirement at 

sections 454(26) and 454A(d) and (f) of 

the Act and the regulatory requirements 

at §§ 303.21 and 307.13. 

Current paragraph (c) regarding 

diligent efforts to serve process is 

unchanged, but is republished to aid the 

reader in reviewing this section. 

Section 303.20, Minimum 

Organizational and Staffing 

Requirements 

The regulation at § 303.20 describes 

the minimum organizational and 

staffing requirements for the IV–D 

program. Paragraph (b) of this section 

requires an organizational structure and 

staff sufficient to fulfill specified State 

level functions, including, in paragraph 

(b)(7), ‘‘operation of the State Parent 

Locator Service as required under 

§§ 302.35, 303.3, and 303.70 of this 

chapter.’’ 

Section 303.21, Safeguarding and 

Disclosure of Confidential Information 

This new regulation is discussed in 

Section II.B. 

Section 303.70, Procedures for 

Submissions to the State Parent Locator 

Service (State PLS) or the Federal Parent 

Locator Service (Federal PLS) 

With passage of legislation that 

established the National Directory of 

New Hires (NDNH) in 1996 and 

established the Federal Case Registry 

(FCR) in 1998, the Federal PLS became 

highly automated. The language in this 

section has been revised to indicate that 

the Federal PLS reflects the automated 

matching and return of information to 

IV–D programs in IV–D cases from the 

Federal PLS’s Federal Case Registry and 

National Directory of New Hires. For 

example, while requests for Federal PLS 

information are accepted, State IV–D 

programs no longer ‘‘request’’ Federal 

PLS information and we replaced the 

word ‘‘requests’’ with ‘‘submittals’’ 

wherever it appears. We eliminated the 

word ‘‘office’’ as in State PLS ‘‘office’’ 

to demonstrate that this work is 

automated. 

A new paragraph (a) has been 

inserted: The State agency will have 

procedures for submitting to the State 

PLS or the Federal PLS for the purpose 

of locating parents, putative fathers, or 

children for the purpose of establishing 

parentage or establishing, setting the 

amount of, modifying, or enforcing 

child support obligations; or for the 

purpose of enforcing any Federal or 

State law with respect to the unlawful 

taking or restraint of a child; or making 

or enforcing a child custody or 

visitation determination as defined in 

section 463(d)(1) of the Act. The 

previous paragraph (a) has been 

redesignated as paragraph (b) and the 

previous paragraph (b) has been 

redesignated as paragraph (c). 

In addition, in newly designated 

paragraph (d) all submittals shall 

contain the following information: (1) 

The parent’s or putative father’s name; 

(2) the parent’s or putative father’s 

Social Security Number (SSN). If the 

SSN is unknown the IV–D program 

must make reasonable efforts to 

ascertain the individual’s SSN before 

making a submittal to the Federal PLS; 

and (3) any other information prescribed 

by the Office. 

The previous regulation at § 303.70(d) 

has been redesignated as paragraph (e). 

It requires that annually the IV–D 

director attest to compliance with the 

listed requirements. Paragraph (e)(1)(i) 

specifies that the IV–D program will 

‘‘obtain’’ rather than ‘‘request’’ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 56425 

information. A new paragraph (e)(1)(ii) 

clarifies that the IV–D program will only 

provide information to authorized 

persons as specified in sections 453(c) 

and 463(d) of the Act and § 302.35. 

Paragraph (e)(2) is new and requires 

that, in the case of a submittal made on 

behalf of a resident parent, legal 

guardian, attorney or agent of a child 

not receiving assistance under title IV– 

A, the IV–D program must verify that 

the requestor has complied with the 

provisions of § 302.35. 

Paragraph (e)(3), formerly paragraph 

(d)(2), has been changed to specify that 

the IV–D program shall treat 

information obtained through the 

Federal PLS as confidential and shall 

safeguard the information in accordance 

with statutory requirements at § 303.21. 

Paragraph (f) has minor changes. In 

(f)(1) the statutory references have been 

accompanied by explanatory phrases for 

better understanding and in (f)(4)(ii) the 

word ‘‘paid’’ has been changed to 

‘‘transmitted’’ to reflect the change in 

payment methodology due to 

technology advances. 

II.B. Safeguarding and Disclosure of 

Confidential Information (Sections 

303.21 and 307.13) 

Section 303.21, Safeguarding and 

Disclosure of Confidential Information 

The regulation consists of six 

paragraphs: (a) Definitions; (b) Scope; 

(c) General rule; (d) Authorized 

disclosures; (e) Safeguards; and (f) 

Penalties for unauthorized disclosure. 

Section 303.21(a) Definitions 

The regulation begins with a 

definition of the term ‘‘confidential 

information.’’ Paragraph (a)(1) provides 

that ‘‘confidential information’’ means 

any information relating to a specified 

individual or an individual who can be 

identified by reference to one or more 

factors specific to him or her, including, 

but not limited, to the individual’s 

Social Security Number, residential and 

mailing addresses, employment 

information, and financial information. 

Paragraph (a)(2) defines independent 

verification to mean the process of 

acquiring and confirming confidential 

information through the use of a second 

source. The information from the 

second source, which verifies the 

information about NDNH or FCR data, 

may be released to those authorized to 

inspect and use the information as 

authorized under the regulations or the 

Act. 

Section 303.21(b) Scope 

Paragraph (b) reads: ‘‘The 

requirements of this section apply to the 

IV–D agency, any other State or local 

agency or official to whom the IV–D 

agency delegates any of the functions of 

the IV–D program, any official with 

whom a cooperative agreement as 

described in § 302.34 has been entered 

into, and any person or private agency 

from whom the IV–D agency has 

purchased services pursuant to 

§ 304.22.’’ 

Section 303.21(c) General Rule 

Paragraph (c) presents a general rule 

which states that ‘‘[e]xcept as 

authorized by the Act and implementing 

regulations, an entity described in 

paragraph (b) of this section may not 

disclose any confidential information, 

obtained in connection with the 

performance of IV–D functions, outside 

of the administration of the IV–D 

program.’’ 

Section 303.21(d) Authorized 

Disclosures 

Paragraph (d) sets forth the authorized 

disclosures that are exceptions to the 

general rule prohibiting disclosure of 

confidential information. Under 

paragraph (d)(1), upon request, the IV– 

D agency may, to the extent that it does 

not interfere with the IV–D agency 

meeting its own obligations, disclose 

information for certain limited 

purposes. Under paragraph (d)(1) 

information may be shared for 

administration of programs under titles 

IV (TANF, child and family services, 

and foster care and adoption programs), 

XIX (Medicaid program), and XXI (State 

Children’s Health Insurance [SCHIP] 

program) of the Act. The regulation also 

includes disclosure to Tribal programs 

authorized under title IV–A and IV–D of 

the Act. 

Paragraph (d)(2) (previously 

paragraph (d)(2)(iv)) permits the release 

of SDNH information to programs 

designated pursuant to sections 453A 

and 1137 of the Act for income and 

eligibility verification purposes. 

Paragraph (d)(3) requires that 

authorized disclosures under 

§ 303.21(d)(1) and (2) shall not include 

confidential information from the 

National Directory of New Hires, the 

Federal Case Registry, or Internal 

Revenue Service (IRS), unless 

authorized under § 307.13 or unless the 

information has been independently 

verified. A State may independently 

verify the NDNH or the FCR information 

through another source, in which case 

the information from the second source 

may be used. Independent verification 

is the process of acquiring and 

confirming confidential information 

through the use of a second source. The 

information from the second source may 

be released to those authorized to 

inspect and use the information. For 

example, if a State determines that an 

address is correct through a postal 

verification the State can share the 

information it acquired from the second 

source (the Post Office). No IRS 

information can be disclosed outside of 

the administration of the IV–D program, 

unless specifically authorized in Federal 

statute or independently verified. IRS 

information is restricted as specified in 

the Internal Revenue Code (IRC). No 

financial institution information may be 

disclosed outside the IV–D program. 

The restriction on release of financial 

institution information outside the IV– 

D program is due to the liability 

protection given to financial institutions 

for release of information to the Federal 

PLS or to the State IV–D programs for 

child support purposes as indicated in 

section 466(a)(17)(C) of the Act and 

limitations in section 469A of the Act, 

regarding the use of such information. 

Section 303.21(e) Safeguards 

Paragraph (e) provides that ‘‘In 

addition to, and not in lieu of, the 

safeguards described in § 307.13 of this 

chapter, which governs computerized 

support enforcement systems, the IV–D 

agency shall establish appropriate 

safeguards to comply with the 

provisions of this section.’’ These 

safeguards shall also include 

prohibitions against the release of 

information when the State has 

reasonable evidence of domestic 

violence or child abuse against a party 

or a child and that the disclosure of 

such information could be harmful to 

the party or the child, as required by 

§ 454(26) of the Act, and shall include 

use of the family violence indicator 

required under § 307.11(f)(1)(x) of this 

chapter. 

Section 303.21(f) Penalties for 

Unauthorized Disclosure 

Paragraph (f) provides that ‘‘[a]ny 

disclosure or use of confidential 

information in violation of the Act and 

implementing regulations remains 

subject to any State and Federal statutes 

that impose legal sanctions for such 

disclosure.’’ 

Section 307.13 Security and 

Confidentiality for Computerized 

Support Enforcement Systems in 

Operation After October 1, 1997 

Section 307.13 addresses security and 

confidentiality of computerized 

systems. Paragraph (a), (a)(1), and (a)(2) 

are unchanged. Paragraph (a) addresses 

information integrity and security. 

Automated systems must have 

safeguards protecting the integrity, 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

56426 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

accuracy, completeness of, access to, 

and use of data in the computerized 

support enforcement system. These 

safeguards shall include written policies 

concerning access to data by IV–D 

program personnel, and the sharing of 

data with other persons to: (a)(1) Permit 

access to and use of data to the extent 

necessary to carry out the State IV–D 

program under this chapter and (a)(2) 

specify the data which may be used for 

particular IV–D program purposes, and 

the personnel permitted access to such 

data. 

Paragraph (a)(3) permits the IV–D 

agency to exchange data from its 

computerized support enforcement 

system with agencies administering 

other programs under titles IV, XIX, and 

XXI of the Act to the extent necessary 

to carry out State and Tribal agency 

responsibilities under such programs in 

accordance with section 454A(f)(3) of 

the Act; and to the extent that it does 

not interfere with the IV–D agency 

meeting its own obligations. 

Paragraph (a)(4) as written in the 

NPRM has been deleted. It referred to 

welfare-to-work, a grant program that no 

longer exists. The present paragraph 

(a)(4) which previously was paragraph 

(a)(5) has been rewritten for clarity and 

requires written policies that generally 

prohibit disclosure outside the IV–D 

program of National Directory of New 

Hire or Federal Case Registry 

information, or IRS information from 

the computerized support enforcement 

system, to information that has been 

independently verified. IV–A, IV–B, and 

IV–E agencies are authorized under 

various subsections of section 453 of the 

Act to receive NDNH and FCR 

information from the Federal PLS for 

certain specified purposes. Since these 

agencies are authorized to have this 

information, we are permitting the IV– 

D agency to disclose the NDNH or FCR 

information from the IV–D 

computerized support enforcement 

system directly to the IV–A, IV–B, or 

IV–E agency if it is being requested for 

the purpose authorized under section 

453 of the Act. For IV–B and IV–E 

programs this includes establishing 

paternity or parental rights with respect 

to a child. 

III. Section-by-Section Discussion of 

Comments 

This section provides a detailed 

discussion of comments received on the 

proposed rule, and describes changes 

made to the proposed rule. We refer 

generally to actions of the ‘‘Department’’ 

pursuant to the rule. The rule itself 

refers to actions of the ‘‘Secretary’’ but 

the day-to-day activities of the 

Secretary’s functions have been 

delegated and are exercised by other 

Department officials, primarily in the 

Administration for Children and 

Families. ‘‘Office’’ refers to the Federal 

Office of Child Support Enforcement 

(OCSE). We received approximately 200 

comments from 20 IV–D programs 

(including 1 tribe), 3 organizations, and 

1 private citizen. Many comments were 

for points of clarification rather than 

stating support or opposition to the 

proposed regulation. For example, many 

comments indicated a lack of awareness 

on existing longtime requirements such 

as the statutory restrictions of access to 

Federal PLS data on IV–D systems for 

certain unauthorized persons and 

programs. 

General Comments 

There were various comments that are 

not attributable to specific sections of 

the regulation and are discussed below. 

1. Comment: Two commenters ask 

that once the final rule is imposed, 

OCSE provide States with reasonable 

time to implement these regulations, 

which may include changes to State 

legislation and automated systems. 

Another commenter believes the Office 

should make clear what the effective 

date is of this regulation as was done 

with some regulations while 

implementing PRWORA. 

Response: This rule is effective 6 

months from the date of publication. 

2. Comment: One commenter 

requested that the Secretary insert 

language from sections of the Social 

Security Act so the reader does not have 

to look up sections of the Act. 

Response: To do so would 

significantly increase the length of 

regulatory language. We have attempted 

to ensure there are no cross-references 

without a brief summary of the content 

of those statutory sections. 

3. Comment: This regulation possibly 

sets up competing public interests. For 

example: Pitting the confidentiality 

regulation versus the openness of the 

judicial system and court files; the 

regulation versus the State’s public 

policy of open government (Sunshine 

laws); the regulation versus the State 

Constitution’s provision for access to 

public records and meetings. 

Response: These regulations govern 

disclosure of IV–D data under sections 

454(26), 453, and 454A of the Act. A 

wide array of personal information is 

available to IV–D agencies and it is 

imperative that the Federal and State 

governments protect these data to the 

greatest extent possible and use them 

only where necessary for authorized 

purposes. Child support records, 

including Federal PLS information, 

contain information that poses a high 

risk of identity theft, and thus should be 

treated with special care. 

4. Comment: One commenter asks 

why this rule includes proposed 

additional restrictions on sharing 

certain Federal data with other public 

agencies in one part of the rule while 

proposing granting broad access to State 

data to private entities in another part. 

According to the commenter, use of data 

disclosed to other State agencies can be 

easily monitored while private entities 

are less accountable, harder to monitor, 

and more likely to use data for 

unauthorized purposes. 

Response: This regulation is 

determined in large part by explicit 

Federal statute. Section 454(8) of the 

Act says that ‘‘the agency administering 

the (State) plan will establish a service 

to locate parents * * * and shall, 

subject to the privacy safeguards 

required under paragraph (26), disclose 

only the information described in 

sections 453 (Federal PLS) and 463 (Use 

of the Federal PLS in connection with 

enforcement of determination of child 

custody and in cases of parental 

kidnapping) to the authorized persons 

specified in such sections for the 

purposes specified in such sections.’’ 

With respect to private entities the 

regulation at § 302.35(c)(3) requires an 

attestation process that must be used by 

the resident parent, legal guardian, 

attorney, or agent of a child who is not 

receiving assistance under title IV–A of 

the Act when obtaining information on 

or to facilitate the discovery of any 

individual in accordance with section 

453(a)(2) of the Act. 

5. Comment: In 42 U.S.C. 654(26), 

Congress allowed States to have 

flexibility in crafting confidentiality 

requirements. States may find it difficult 

to follow a regulatory ‘‘one size fits all’’ 

approach and make changes to the law 

in matters over which child support 

agencies have no authority. 

Response: The regulation reflects 

statutory requirements as stated in 

section 454(26) of the Act that a child 

support State Plan must provide that 

States have in effect safeguards, 

applicable to all confidential 

information handled by the State 

agency, that are designed to protect the 

privacy rights of the parties involved. It 

also reflects other statutory restrictions 

on disclosure in sections 453 and 454A 

of the Act. 

6. Comment: If the Federal Bureau of 

Investigations (FBI) was called to 

investigate possible sources of threats to 

a IV–D caseworker and the FBI 

demanded the names and contact 

information for every person on the IV– 

D employee’s caseload, would the IV–D 

agency be justified in sharing this 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 56427 

information with the FBI? Does 

protecting a IV–D worker from potential 

harm fall under the provisions of a IV– 

D purpose? 

Response: The IV–D agency could 

share the information because the 

investigation relates to the 

administration of the IV–D program. 

7. Comment: Two commenters say 

that OCSE should reaffirm its 

commitment to additional privacy 

safeguards for family violence victims 

by incorporating references to the family 

violence indicator in the rule. 

Response: We agree and have added 

language to § 303.21(e) that provides 

explicit reference to required family 

violence indicators for potential 

domestic violence or child abuse. 

8. Comment: Two commenters are 

concerned that when enforcing a referral 

from a Tribal IV–D agency located in 

that State or in another State, a State 

would be unable to provide information 

about whether a Federal tax refund 

offset occurred and the amount 

collected. This would make it 

impossible for the Tribal IV–D agency to 

correctly adjust the arrearage to give the 

noncustodial parent credit for the tax 

refund offset. Another commenter 

believes the Internal Revenue Services 

(IRS) statute at 26 U.S.C. 6103 

sufficiently provides for confidentiality 

limitations for States to disclose 

information to Tribes and States. Tribal 

IV–D agencies do not need another 

regulation to further burden 

negotiations with State IV–D agencies. 

Response: Policy Interpretation 

Question (PIQ) 07–02 addresses this. 

See http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ 

cse/pol/PIQ/2007/piq-07-02.htm. A 

State may submit arrearages owed in 

Tribal IV–D cases for Federal tax refund 

offset if the following conditions are 

met: 

1. The approved Tribal IV–D plan or 

plan amendment indicates that the 

Tribe has entered into a cooperative 

agreement with the State under 

§ 309.60(b) and (c) for the State to 

submit arrearages owed in Tribal IV–D 

cases for Federal tax refund offset. The 

Tribe must submit as part of its Tribal 

IV–D plan or plan amendment copies of 

any such agreement. The regulations 

governing Tribal IV–D programs at 

§ 309.35(d) require that after approval of 

the original Tribal IV–D program 

application, all relevant changes 

required by new Federal statutes, rules, 

regulations, and Department 

interpretations are required to be 

submitted so that the Secretary may 

determine whether the plan continues 

to meet Federal requirements and 

policies. 

2. The cooperative agreement between 

the Tribe and State includes a statement 

that the Tribal IV–D program will 

comply with all safeguarding 

requirements with respect to Federal tax 

refund offset in accordance with 

§ 309.80, section 454(26) of the Act and 

the Internal Revenue Code 26 U.S.C. 

6103, which prohibits the release of IRS 

information outside of the IV–D 

program. 

3. The Tribal IV–D plan provides 

evidence that the Tribe’s application for 

IV–D services under § 309.65(a)(2) 

includes a statement that the applicant 

is applying for State IV–D services for 

purposes of submitting arrearages for 

Federal tax refund offset. 

9. Comment: One commenter says 

there must be an easy-to-use procedure 

for individuals misidentified by child 

support database programs to correct 

agency records and also requests that 

this rule provide for a system to flag 

errors where files are ‘‘mixed.’’ 

Response: If an individual believes he 

or she has been misidentified by the IV– 

D system, he or she should contact the 

appropriate IV–D office. The IV–D 

program should fix the error as soon as 

possible. These regulations do not go 

into the details of step-by-step State case 

processing that would make such a 

proposal appropriate. 

10. Comment: One commenter 

requests that language in the preamble 

to the proposed rule be incorporated 

into the actual regulation. Page 60044, 

column 3 says ‘‘programs receiving 

confidential information may use the 

information only for the purpose for 

which it was disclosed and may not 

redisclose the information.’’ However, 

this restriction on redisclosure is not in 

the text of the proposed rule. 

Response: This regulation is for title 

IV–D programs and we cannot regulate 

other programs once information is 

disclosed. However, State IV–D 

programs must make clear to those 

authorized to receive child support data, 

the limited purpose for which 

information may be used. Improper use 

or disclosure would be governed by 

State and Federal statutes that impose 

penalties for such disclosure. 

11. Comment: One commenter says 

there is no legislative history that 

Congress contemplated expanding 

access to State databases and records 

beyond the IV–D program or beyond 

what is otherwise permitted by State 

law. 

Response: The provisions relating to 

the State PLS implement section 454(8) 

of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 654(8), which 

requires each State plan for child 

support enforcement to provide that the 

State will: (1) Establish a service to 

locate parents utilizing all sources of 

information and available records 

including the Federal PLS; and (2) be 

subject to the privacy safeguards in 

section 454(26) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 

654(26) and disclose only the 

information described in sections 453 

and 463 of the Act to the authorized 

persons specified in those sections. This 

language authorizes a system of 

disclosure of State data based on the 

system in place for the Federal PLS. We 

have revised the regulation to recognize 

the possibility of more restricted access 

to State data by incorporating the 

language ‘‘in accordance with State 

law.’’ 

12. Comment: One commenter is 

concerned that States are not informing 

individuals when disclosure of their 

Social Security Number (SSN) to 

another source will occur and by 

collecting noncustodial parents’ SSNs 

from a third party source. 

Response: States are required to 

comply with section 7(b) of the Privacy 

Act and its disclosure requirements (5 

U.S.C. 552a). In all IV–D cases, the 

Privacy Act requires a Federal, State, or 

local government agency to provide 

certain information to the individual 

from whom a SSN is requested by the 

agency. 

13. Comment: One commenter says 

that notice and due process are required 

when States use, release, or enter data 

into State PLS and Federal PLS 

computer interface records on 

individuals who do not need to be 

located for purposes of child support. 

Response: Access to personal data 

covered by the regulation is authorized 

as explicitly provided for in Federal title 

IV–D statute. 

Section 302.35, State Parent Locator 

Service 

1. Comment: Two commenters have 

major concerns with this section. One 

would like to know the reason for these 

amendments, opposes the requirement 

that the State PLS provide information 

to requestors with regard to in-state 

sources, and strongly recommends that 

references to access and release of instate State PLS information be deleted 

from the proposed regulation. The other 

commenter is concerned with this 

section and believes the regulation 

erodes the capability of the child 

support program to safeguard 

confidential information. The regulation 

creates a presumption, not supported by 

law, that non-IV–D entities may access 

in-state resources. 

Response: A State/Federal workgroup, 

established after the passage of the 

Personal Responsibility and Work 

Opportunity Reconciliation Act, 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

56428 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

recommended that these regulations be 

promulgated in order to clarify the 

statutory limitations of sharing data. In 

response to comments we have revised 

the regulation to provide State searches 

only to the extent authorized by State 

law. With regard to in-state sources, 

section 454(8) of the Act says a State 

shall be subject to the privacy 

safeguards in section 454(26) of the Act, 

42 U.S.C. 654(26). 

2. Comment: One commenter asks 

why the regulation does not clearly tie 

authorized persons to the authorized 

purposes for which they may receive 

locate information, addressing persons 

and in separate subsections. 

Response: We disagree. The 

authorized persons and purposes are 

clearly stated in the regulation and are 

identical to those of the Federal PLS. 

Appendix A displays this set of 

authorities. 

3. Comment: One commenter would 

like to eliminate the reference in 

Appendix A that says ‘‘No automated 

system’’ for Authorized Purpose B, C, 

and D. 

Response: This Appendix and others 

have been revised and/or added. Any 

limitation of disclosure of automated 

systems data is required by section 

454A of the Act. 

4. Comment: One commenter 

proposes adding a section to this 

provision that requires maintenance of 

an audit log to deter employee misuse 

of databases. Audit logs hold 

individuals responsible for their use of 

personal information databases and 

would record who accesses personal 

information, and the purpose for which 

it was accessed. 

Response: Federal requirements do 

not prescribe this level of mandate on 

State responsibilities. It is up to the 

State to implement necessary and 

appropriate methods to ensure that 

access and disclosure is for proper 

purposes and only to authorized 

persons. States have discretion, 

however, to implement similar audit 

procedures. 

5. Comment: One commenter 

recommends moving § 302.35(b) closer 

to § 302.35(a) to clarify that the Federal 

PLS is considered part of the State PLS 

for IV–D cases and for authorized nonIV–D purposes under this section. 

Response: The Federal PLS is not part 

of the State PLS. Subparagraph (b) is 

based on the requirement that requests 

for Federal PLS data must flow through 

the State PLS. 

6. Comment: One commenter asks for 

confirmation that together 

§§ 302.35(a)(1) and (2) and 302.35(c) 

limit the use of the State PLS for IV–D 

cases to only IV–D purposes but permits 

the use of the State PLS for non-IV–D 

individuals or non-IV–D cases for the 

authorized non-IV–D purposes. 

Response: Section 302.35(a)(1) and (2) 

limit the use of the State PLS for IV–D 

cases to only IV–D purposes but permits 

the use of SPLS for non-IV–D 

individuals or non-IV–D cases for the 

authorized non-IV–D purposes. 

7. Comment: One commenter suggests 

that the title of paragraph (1) be changed 

to ‘‘For IV–D cases and IV–D purposes’’ 

for clarity. 

Response: For clarity, we have revised 

the title of paragraphs (1) and (2) to 

distinguish between IV–D requests and 

non-IV–D requests. 

8. Comment: One commenter asks 

that the Office clarify why locate 

information, restricted for custody and 

visitation purposes to the most recent 

address and place of employment, 

requires such strict confidentiality 

where there is not a family violence 

indicator or other information giving 

rise to safety concerns for the parties. 

The address of a litigant to a court 

proceeding is considered public 

information and necessary for the case 

to proceed. 

Response: The restriction is statutory. 

Section 463(c) of the Act [Use of Federal 

PLS in connection with the enforcement 

or determination of child custody and in 

cases of parental kidnapping of a child] 

contains the restriction ‘‘Only 

information as to the most recent 

address and place of employment of any 

parent or child shall be provided under 

this section.’’ 

9. Comment: In addition to using the 

State PLS for locating either parent for 

IV–D purposes, one commenter asks 

that the agency also be able to use the 

State PLS for locating the child for IV– 

D purposes. 

Response: IV–D agencies already have 

that authority with the Federal PLS. 

Section 453(a)(2)(iii), which states ‘‘to 

whom such an obligation is owed’’ 

includes the child. However, in 

response to this comment, we have 

added ‘‘children’’ to § 302.35(a)(1). 

10. Comment: One commenter points 

out what he or she believes to be a 

mistake: ‘‘Child’’ is included in 

Appendix A to § 302.35 under 

‘‘Authorized Purpose’’ but is not 

included in the preamble or in the 

regulation. Another commenter suggests 

that this section of the regulation be 

revised by deleting the words 

‘‘noncustodial parents’’ and inserting ‘‘a 

parent or child.’’ 

Response: We agree and have 

included reference to custodial parents, 

noncustodial parents and children in 

both the preamble and the regulation at 

§ 302.35. 

11. Comment: One commenter 

suggests substituting the word ‘‘parties’’ 

for ‘‘parents’’ since the IV–D or a 

cooperating agency may be enforcing a 

support order in a IV–D case for a 

custodial party other than a parent. 

Response: The statute uses the term 

parent, although we recognize there may 

be instances where children are in the 

custodial care of individuals other than 

their parents. 

12. Comment: One commenter points 

out that the reference to § 303.3 in the 

second sentence of § 302.35(a)(1) creates 

confusion because § 303.3 only 

addresses locate requirements for 

noncustodial parents in IV–D cases. The 

commenter assumes this is not the 

intent of the proposed regulation and, to 

avoid confusion, recommends removing 

the second sentence of § 302.35(a)(1) 

because the first sentence clearly 

conveys the intent of the subsection. 

Response: We agree and have 

removed the reference to § 303.3, which 

only applies to location of noncustodial 

parents in IV–D cases. 

13. Comment: Several commenters 

had comments relating to the use of the 

State Disbursement Unit in non-IV–D 

case situations. Since it is a IV–D 

function to disburse support to 

custodial parents in non-IV–D cases 

subject to income withholding, can a 

IV–D program use the State PLS or 

Federal PLS to locate a non-IV–D 

custodial parent for purposes of 

disbursing child support? 

Response: Yes, this would be a 

legitimate use of locate sources for IV– 

D agencies seeking to locate such 

custodial parents in non-IV–D cases 

subject to income withholding. 

14. Comment: One commenter points 

out a contradiction in the regulation 

regarding the use of in-state locate 

sources. On the one hand, § 302.35(a)(2) 

provides a mechanism for States to ‘‘opt 

out’’ of using in-state locate sources in 

response to a non-IV–D request if such 

use is ‘‘prohibited by State law or 

written policy.’’ Yet § 302.35(e) states 

‘‘the State PLS shall disclose * * * 

information from in-state locate sources 

as required by this section and 

described in § 303.3(b)(1).’’ This latter 

language suggests that expanded access 

is required regardless of State law or 

written policy, which is contrary to the 

intent expressed in the preamble to the 

proposed rule, as well as the intent of 

the statute. 

Response: We agree. We have revised 

the language to provide in-state searches 

in accordance with State law. 

15. Comment: One commenter 

requests that the following terms be 

eliminated in the final rule: Non-IV–D 

individual(s); non-IV–D case(s); non-IV– 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 56429 

D request(s) and be replaced with ‘‘nonIV–D purpose’’ and another commenter 

asked that the Office provide a 

definition of non-IV–D purpose. 

Response: Reference to all four terms 

is appropriate each time a specific term 

is used in the regulation. Non-IV–D 

purpose is addressed in paragraph (d): 

the State PLS shall obtain location 

information under this section only for 

the purposes specified in paragraphs 

(d)(1) and (d)(2) of § 302.35. Section 453 

of the Act provides statutory authority 

for using the Federal PLS for the 

purpose of locating any individual who 

has or may have parental rights with 

respect to a child, enforcing any State or 

Federal law with respect to the unlawful 

taking or restraint of a child; or making 

or enforcing a child custody or 

visitation determination. 

16. Comment: One commenter seeks 

confirmation that taken together, these 

sections mean that once a State 

establishes policy to define State PLS 

sources of information, any other data 

contained in the State’s computerized 

support enforcement system may not be 

released under this section, regardless of 

the source of that information. 

Response: The State’s computerized 

support enforcement system is not a 

source of information for the State PLS. 

Access to any data on the statewide 

automated system is limited in sections 

454A(d) and (f) of the Act and 45 CFR 

part 307. Independently verified 

information may be released to those 

authorized to access and use the 

information. For example, if a State 

determines that an address is correct 

through a postal verification the State 

can share the information it acquired 

from the second source (the Post Office). 

17. Comment: One commenter 

strongly suggests that this proposed 

regulation be modified to make it clear 

that it is the Federal OCSE’s 

responsibility to exclude IRS 

information, or MSFIDM information 

when in receipt of a non-IV–D request 

for FPLS information. 

Response: If the State codes its 

requests correctly, (e.g., pk, ad, etc.), 

OCSE only returns appropriate 

information for that request. Please see 

the FCR Interface Guidance Document 

(Chart 6–14) http://www.acf.hhs.gov/ 

programs/cse/newhire/library/fcr/ 

fcr.htm. However, the State may have 

such information in its files and the 

State bears the responsibility to assure 

that only authorized information is 

released in response to a request. 

18. Comment: One commenter 

strongly suggests that there be a simple 

system set up for OCSE to receive 

formal requests from States (preferably 

online with a predefined outgoing and 

incoming data format) that would 

ensure that all requests to the Federal 

PLS are properly documented and the 

authorized information would be 

returned in a pre-defined format 

suitable to direct redisclosure to 

authorized requestors. The States’ only 

duty would be to submit and return 

requests for information on behalf of 

non-IV–D authorized requestors. This 

would greatly enhance the security and 

confidentiality of this Federal 

requirement. 

Response: The FCR Interface 

Guidance Document, mentioned above, 

provides this service. For example, a 

Foster Care case locate-only code 

provides only authorized information 

but a request with a IV–D code provides 

much more data because the request is 

on a IV–D case. 

19. Comment: One commenter 

believes a better approach for this 

section would be for those individuals 

who desire child support services under 

the title IV–D program, including 

location services, to apply for services. 

Response: The Federal statute at 

sections 453 and 454(8) of the Act 

require States to disclose certain 

information to authorized non-IV–D 

persons for authorized purposes. Such 

purposes includes access for locate 

purposes. There is no requirement that 

individuals apply for IV–D services to 

receive requested information. 

20. Comment: One State does not 

support requiring the State PLS to 

release information gathered from instate sources to non-IV–D individuals 

unless there is a State law or policy 

prohibiting such a release as provided 

in § 302.35(a)(2)(i) and believes this 

requirement exceeds the authority 

granted in 42 U.S.C. 653(a)(2) which 

pertains only to Federal PLS 

information. Instead, the State favors a 

provision that authorizes the State PLS 

to release in-state source information 

only if permitted under State law or 

regulation. 

Response: We accept the commenter’s 

position and have revised the regulation 

accordingly. 

21. Comment: Two commenters 

would like recognized that the preamble 

claims States have interpreted current 

law ‘‘to permit use of State resources for 

non-IV–D location purposes, including 

location for custody and visitation 

purposes’’ and notes that while a 

handful of States may permit broad 

access to State databases by private 

entities, these practices are not 

widespread and are not based on a 

common or settled interpretation of 

Federal law. Because some States have 

chosen to disclose State PLS and 

Federal PLS information to non-IV–D 

requestors should not be the basis of 

requiring all States to do so. 

Response: See response to comment 

20. 

22. Comment: A commenter says that 

if a State wishes to disclose State PLS 

data, it should have to have a written 

law or policy describing what it will 

disclose, to whom it will disclose it, and 

under what circumstances. In the 

absence of such a policy, State PLS data 

should not be disclosed to non-IV–D 

entities. 

Response: It is up to the State to set 

standards for disclosure. 

23. Comment: One commenter 

believes the final regulation should 

acknowledge that there may be other 

State laws governing the disclosure of 

personal data to nongovernmental 

entities if any mention of State duty to 

provide State PLS data is retained. 

Response: We believe the revised 

language ‘‘in accordance with State 

law’’ takes this into account. 

24. Comment: One commenter would 

like clarification on the reason for the 

restriction that prevents the State PLS 

from searching the statewide computer 

system or providing a non-IV–D 

requestor with any information 

contained in the system. The 

commenter asks for the rationale behind 

this restriction and an explanation on 

how OCSE envisions compliance by 

States whose non-IV–D cases are part of 

their statewide computer system. 

Response: Access to information in 

the IV–D automated system is strictly 

limited by Federal statute. Section 454A 

of the Act restricts disclosure of 

information in a State IV–D automated 

system to purposes related to the 

administration of the IV–D program so 

non-IV–D requestors cannot get such 

information. 

25. Comment: One commenter says 

that the language referring to the 

support enforcement computer system 

(along with Appendix A) can be read to 

prohibit the release of information 

contained in the system even where that 

information was derived from non-IRS 

or non-MSFIDM sources and asks 

whether this was the intent. 

Response: Yes, this is the intent. The 

Federal statute at sections 454A(d) and 

(f) clearly restricts access to and 

disclosure of State automated child 

support system data. 

26. Comment: One commenter 

requests further explanation or 

clarification regarding the prohibition 

against releasing information from 

automated support enforcement systems 

to fulfill non-IV–D requests. 

Clarification is needed because any 

information received in the course of 

IV–D program business is typically 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

56430 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

registered in such system; therefore, 

exactly what may be legally disclosed 

under § 302.35(a)(2)(ii) is unclear. 

Response: Section 454A of the Act 

does not authorize access to State 

systems for non-IV–D purposes. 

Therefore, a State may only seek or 

locate information in a non-IV–D case 

directly from the State PLS or from the 

Federal PLS and disclose that data to a 

non-IV–D requestor. (Also see # 27. 

below.) 

27. Comment: One commenter seeks 

clarification that the idea of 

§ 302.35(a)(2)(ii) is that if a State 

receives a non-IV–D request, it may not 

look to any information ‘‘existing’’ on its 

system but rather must conduct State 

PLS and Federal PLS searches for 

information and only the information 

resulting from those searches could be 

released, as authorized. 

Response: Yes, if a State receives a 

non-IV–D request, it may not look to any 

information ‘‘existing’’ in its system but 

rather must conduct State PLS and 

Federal PLS searches for information 

and only the information resulting from 

those searches can be released. 

28. Comment: One commenter notes 

that § 302.35(c)(3) indicates that the 

State PLS may use some sources of data 

for non-IV–D location requests. 

However, it is noted in other parts that 

the State PLS shall not release 

information from the computerized 

support enforcement system. Many of 

the location sources the State agency 

uses feed into, and become part of, the 

computerized support enforcement 

system. Is the regulation forbidding the 

use of the CSE system to access 

otherwise permissible State sources of 

information? 

Response: The regulation prohibits 

release of information residing on the 

State’s computerized support 

enforcement system, unless explicitly 

authorized. States may only share 

information on their automated system 

with authorized entities under 45 CFR 

Part 307. The State PLS may use the 

automated system to seek information 

from other sources as part of its location 

efforts in IV–D cases. 

29. Comment: One commenter 

proposes new language for 

§ 302.35(a)(2)(ii) ‘‘* * * IRS 

information or financial institution data 

match information relating to a financial 

account * * *’’ Incorporating this 

language would allow other information 

(such as address information) from 

MSFIDM to be released pursuant to a 

non-IV–D request. 

Response: We are not incorporating 

the proposed change because of the 

need to safeguard all data received from 

a financial institution data match. 

30. Comment: One commenter wants 

IV–B/IV–E agencies to be able to view 

limited, address-related data from other 

States’ IRS and financial institutions if 

such information could assist in 

locating the parent or person who could 

be a child’s parent and is otherwise not 

available in any other system. 

Response: There is no authority under 

title IV–D of the Act or the Internal 

Revenue Service Code to allow this. 

31. Comment: One commenter 

disagrees with prohibiting the State PLS 

in non-IV–D requests from disclosing 

information from the computerized 

support system because 42 U.S.C. 654(8) 

mandates that States use ‘‘all sources of 

information and available records’’ to 

locate parents regardless of whether 

they are involved in a IV–D case. The 

State could not defend such a policy to 

its judges and asks why such a 

prohibition in this rule is necessary. 

Response: A State’s defense would be 

that Federal law prohibits such 

disclosure. Section 454A(f) of the Act 

specially governs data in IV–D 

automated systems and strictly limits 

disclosure. 

32. Comment: One commenter asks 

what is the statutory basis for 

prohibiting disclosure of MSFIDM 

information for all non-IV–D requests. 

Because Federal statute limits use of 

financial record information from a 

financial institution ‘‘only for the 

purpose of * * * establishing, 

modifying or enforcing a child support 

obligation’’, it appears FIDM 

information could be used for both IV– 

D and non-IV–D child support purposes. 

Response: IV–D programs have 

statutory responsibility to safeguard 

confidential information not specifically 

authorized for release under section 453 

of the Act. The IV–D program has broad 

access to certain data of all sorts from 

myriad sources. We believe it is 

essential to strictly limit access to data. 

Section 469A of the Act only provides 

for nonliability for financial institutions 

for disclosures to a State Child Support 

Enforcement agency or to the Federal 

PLS for purposes of section 466(a)(17) of 

the Act. The statute provides that the 

information be used only for IV–D 

purposes. 

33. Comment: One commenter 

supports while another seeks 

clarification that § 302.35(a)(2)(ii) 

prohibits release of information from the 

State’s computerized support 

enforcement system even if that 

information is obtained from non-IRS or 

non-MSFIDM sources. 

Response: States may not release any 

information in a State’s IV–D automated 

system except to specifically authorized 

requestors and for purposes related to 

the administration of the IV–D program. 

Non-IV–D access is not authorized 

under section 454A of the Act. See 

§ 307.13. 

34. Comment: One commenter says 

that because States can not transmit 

non-IV–D requests to another State, an 

authorized requestor would be required 

to make multiple requests. 

Response: This is correct. However, 

an authorized requestor can obtain 

certain information from the Federal 

PLS which may contain some of the 

State data, namely the employment 

data. 

35. Comment: One commenter notes 

that while § 302.35(a)(2)(iii) specifies 

that for non-IV–D location requests, the 

IV–D program need not make 

subsequent location attempts if a 

location attempt fails, the preamble 

discussion says that a relocation attempt 

would be required if a requestor 

demonstrates that there is reason to 

believe new information exists. The 

proposed rule should clearly state that 

a relocation attempt is a requirement in 

this circumstance, if that is the intent. 

Response: We have changed the 

language to clarify that no subsequent 

attempt to locate is necessary unless a 

new request is submitted. 

36. Comment: One commenter asks 

under what circumstance the State PLS 

can provide Federal PLS with 

information. 

Response: The State IV–D program is 

required to provide State Directory of 

New Hires and Federal Case Registry 

information. In addition, under section 

453(e), the Federal PLS may seek 

information from any of the 

‘‘departments, agencies, or 

instrumentalities of the United States or 

of any State.’’ 

37. Comment: Child welfare staff in 

one State request a broader 

interpretation of § 302.35(a)(2)(iii), 

whereas, in order to facilitate the 

administration of programs under titles 

IV–B or IV–E, State PLS and Federal 

PLS locate attempts should occur at the 

same frequency as for IV–D programs 

(quarterly, at a minimum, or when new 

information leads are received). 

Response: State IV–D agencies are not 

required to repeat locate results for nonIV–D entities unless a new request is 

submitted. However, States are free to 

establish the extent and frequency of 

authorized IV–B or IV–E locate requests. 

38. Comment: One commenter 

believes that because § 302.35(a)(2)(iv) 

prohibits making State PLS requests 

separate from Federal PLS requests in 

non-IV–D cases, there is no need to 

develop a separate standard for the State 

PLS. Another commenter requests 

clarification that even if it can get the 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 56431 

requested information from State 

sources, the State must use the Federal 

PLS. If so, why would that be necessary? 

Response: Based on comments 

received and the desire to allow States 

to retain the flexibility to conduct either 

State PLS or Federal PLS searches (or 

both) we have removed 

§ 302.35(a)(2)(iv) in the final rule. If a 

State successfully uses State PLS 

sources and locates the individual 

sought, there may be no need to submit 

a request to the Federal PLS. However, 

if the IV–B or IV–E agency wants a 

Federal PLS request, the State must 

honor that request. 

39. Comment: If a IV–D caseworker is 

aware of a new address for a 

noncustodial parent when the IV–E 

agency requests the address for an 

authorized purpose, can the IV–D 

program provide the address directly or 

must the agency conduct an 

independent State PLS search? 

Response: If the information is 

already known, the IV–D agency is 

authorized to release the information 

under § 307.13(a)(3) and section 

454A(f)(3) of the Act. This permits 

exchanging information with State 

Medicaid agencies and other programs 

designated by the Secretary or other 

State or Federal agencies to carry out 

this part, subject to section 6103 of the 

Internal Revenue Code of 1986. 

40. Comment: One State recommends 

that States retain the ability to designate 

other IV–D offices within the State to 

submit requests to the Federal PLS 

when location services are needed 

instead of requiring a ‘‘central’’ State 

PLS. 

Response: We tried to accommodate 

multiple State PLS locate interfaces in 

the past; however, from a costeffectiveness and quality control 

standpoint, States now are limited to a 

central State PLS interface with Federal 

PLS. 

41. Comment: One commenter wants 

acknowledgment that although on the 

surface this seems to provide flexibility, 

§ 302.35(c) sets up the strong possibility 

of inconsistency among States and will 

allow forum shopping for the best deal 

by ‘‘attorneys or agents of the child.’’ 

Response: Section 302.35(a)(2)(i) 

allows access to the State PLS in 

accordance with State law. As such, 

State practices may vary. We support 

State flexibility in this regard. 

42. Comment: One commenter asks 

whether there is any authority that 

supersedes Federal law on releasing 

information only to persons authorized 

under sections 453 and 463 that would 

require IV–D agencies to comply with a 

request from the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS) since DHS is 

not an ‘‘authorized person’’ under 

sections 453 or 463 of the Act. 

Response: There is no authority to 

override sections 453 and 463 of the 

Act. 

43. Comment: In the final regulations 

one commenter requests that States have 

the ability to deny requests from nonIV–D entities which have a track record 

of obtaining information for purposes 

beyond those contemplated by the 

statute as well as those who have not 

properly safeguarded the information 

they have obtained. 

Response: A fine for misuse of the 

NDNH in section 453(l) of the Act can 

be applied. Also, § 303.21(f) gives ability 

for State to impose fines or other 

criminal or civil sanctions. Finally, 

attestation is designed to protect/ 

alleviate this issue. A IV–D agency 

should document instances of abuse and 

if a non-IV–D entity is known to abuse 

access to data, access should be denied 

and the reason noted. States should 

have written policy which may provide 

guidance in this area. 

44. Comment: One commenter would 

like confirmation regarding the extent to 

which staff determining food stamp 

eligibility have access to confidential 

data or location data maintained or 

obtained by the IV–D program. 

Response: Food Stamp agencies have 

access to the State Directory for New 

Hires for purposes of verifying 

eligibility for the program. See 42 U.S.C. 

653A(h)(2). 

45. Comment: Two commenters 

suggest that Tribal IV–D agencies be 

specifically included as an ‘‘authorized 

person’’ in § 302.35(c)(1). 

Response: Tribal IV–D agencies have 

access to the State PLS if they request 

assistance from a State IV–D agency and 

submit a referral for case information. 

The State agency will submit the case to 

the State PLS as part of its 

responsibilities with respect to the case. 

46. Comment: One commenter 

understands the proposed change to 

permit a court to obtain location 

information for the purposes of 

establishing a support order, even in a 

non-IV–D case. Yet, the court need not 

attest to its intent; whereas an 

attestation is required from a resident 

parent, legal guardian, attorney, or 

agent. Is this an oversight or an 

intentional distinction? 

Response: It is intentional because 

courts are governmental entities. The 

attestation is required of private citizens 

or nongovernmental entities. 

47. Comment: One commenter 

recommends changing the term ‘‘aid’’ to 

‘‘assistance as defined at 45 CFR 

260.31’’ in § 302.35(c)(3). This way, 

there will be a clear national policy in 

this area. 

Response: We have changed the term 

‘‘aid’’ to ‘‘assistance’’ in § 302.35(c)(3) 

because that is the terminology used in 

the statute. We have not cited IV–A 

regulation, however, since it could 

change in the future. 

48. Comment: One commenter asks 

how long must the locate application, 

attestation, and evidence of 

authorization be maintained by the State 

PLS? Does the standard three-year 

record retention policy apply to these 

documents? 

Response: The three-year record 

retention rule, as stated in 45 CFR 

92.42(b), applies to these documents. 

49. Comment: One commenter would 

like to eliminate the reference to a child 

not receiving aid under title IV–A of the 

Act in § 302.35(c)(3) and wants 

corresponding changes to be made to 

Appendix A to § 302.35(c)(3). 

Response: Section 453 of the Act 

requires the inclusion of this exception. 

50. Comment: Three commenters ask 

if a requestor attests to the purpose and 

use of information that is later 

discovered to be fraudulent in nature; 

will the IV–D program be found liable 

by OCSE? One commenter asks what the 

penalties are if a requestor violates the 

attestation or submits a fake 

‘‘authorization’’? 

Response: The IV–D agency would 

not be responsible if it had the 

attestation on file. Any requestor who 

violates requirements for receiving 

Federal PLS information would be 

subject to any Federal or State penalties. 

51. Comment: One commenter asks 

whether a State is required to pass 

special laws imposing penalties for 

failure to comply with the provisions of 

the attestation. 

Response: States have discretion to 

pass such laws. 

52. Comment: One commenter agrees 

with the proposed rule requiring the 

requestor to provide evidence of being 

the legal guardian, attorney of the child 

or agent of the child. However, he or she 

suggests if the requestor is a resident 

parent, the requestor only attest to being 

so rather than providing evidence. It 

would be difficult for the State PLS to 

identify proof of resident parent status 

otherwise. 

Response: We agree with the 

commenter and have changed the 

language in § 302.35(c)(3)(iii) to require 

the resident parent to attest to being the 

resident parent. 

53. Comment: One commenter asks 

whether private child support 

enforcement agencies have to provide 

‘‘evidence of a valid contract’’ with each 

request for locate or may the IV–D 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

56432 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

program permit a private child support 

enforcement agency to provide an 

annual, blanket attestation that a valid 

contract exists for each request made 

during the year? 

Response: The private child support 

enforcement agency may not provide an 

annual blanket attestation that a valid 

contract exists for all requests made 

during that year. 

54. Comment: One commenter 

recommends a change to 

§ 302.35(c)(3)(iii) so that both attorneys 

and agents who allege that they are 

representing a child are required to 

provide a valid contract that meets any 

requirements under State law or policy 

for acting as an agent of the child. 

Otherwise, the regulation will violate 

the statutory authority on which it is 

based. 

Response: The statute does not 

specify any proof or evidence that must 

be provided. Section 302.35(c)(3)(iii) 

indicates that an authorized person 

provide evidence that the requestor is 

the legal guardian, attorney, or agent of 

a child not receiving assistance under 

title IV–A, and if an agent of such a 

child, evidence of a valid contract that 

meets any requirements in State law or 

written policy for acting as an agent. 

55. Comment: One commenter 

believes that because of the potential for 

disclosure to unauthorized entities, 

§ 302.35(c)(3)(iii) should require the 

requestor to furnish a copy of the actual 

contract, not just ‘‘evidence of a valid 

contract.’’ Another commenter wants 

clarification on what evidence is other 

than a copy. 

Response: Evidence of a valid contract 

may be defined by the State. Therefore, 

a State may require the requestor to 

furnish a copy of the actual contract. 

56. One commenter suggests adding 

the words ‘‘of the child’’ after the word 

‘‘agent’’ in § 302.35(c)(3)(iii) in order to 

track the statute and make clear that the 

only agents who are authorized persons 

are agents of the child, not of a parent. 

Response: We agree with the 

commenter and have revised the 

regulation to reflect the statutory 

language. 

57. One commenter believes that 

§ 302.35(c)(3)(iii) will be hard to meet 

for a requestor who claims to be ‘‘an 

agent of such a child.’’ Existing State 

laws ‘‘for acting as an agent’’ may not 

be clear or complete to support this 

process. 

Response: This is an issue for a State 

to address. 

58. Comment: Two commenters 

question whether private collection 

agencies (PCAs) and attorneys meet the 

statutory definition of ‘‘authorized 

persons’’ and are concerned about 

giving private collection agencies access 

to information. There is no clear 

definition of ‘‘attorney or agent of the 

child’’ in the regulations or in statute 

and in one State, PCAs do not fall 

within this definition. Most private 

attorneys in child support matters 

represent a parent, not a child. PCA 

contracts are entered into by a custodial 

parent in her (sic) own right, not as the 

child’s legal agent. An agency 

relationship is created by expressed or 

implied contract or by operation of law, 

and generally is governed by State law, 

not Federal law. In addition, it is a 

settled matter of black letter law that a 

contract must be between competent 

parties and that a minor is under the age 

of legal competence. Therefore, a 

custodial parent’s contract with a PCA 

does not make the PCA an ‘‘agent of the 

child’’ for purposes of locate request 

under section 453 of the Act. 

Response: AT–02–04 clarifies policy 

and procedures for providing Federal 

PLS locate services to persons who 

qualify as an ‘‘an agent of the child’’ for 

child support purposes. The Action 

Transmittal lists the definitions of 

‘‘authorized persons’’ set forth in 

section 453(c)(1) through (3) of the Act, 

including the resident parent, legal 

guardian, attorney, or agent of the child. 

We do not read section 453 of the Act 

to prohibit a State from sending 

appropriate Federal PLS information to 

the resident parent in care of a PCA if, 

under State law, the PCA ‘‘stands in the 

shoes’’ of the resident parent and the 

State has evidence in the form of an 

attestation by the requestor, under 

§ 302.35(c)(3)(iii) that the parent, in fact, 

has authorized the PCA to act on his or 

her behalf. 

59. Comment: One commenter wants 

changes made to reflect that States 

should be required to develop standards 

and protocols for refusing to provide 

information to non-IV–D entities when 

such entities fail to safeguard the 

information they obtain. These 

standards should include provisions for 

notifying such entities of what 

restrictions apply, what protections they 

must have in place, and what the 

consequences of failure to safeguard the 

information are. 

Response: We agree that such 

standards are reasonable but leave such 

action to State discretion. 

60. Comment: One commenter 

believes that the administrative cost 

associated with developing and 

implementing a fee for non-IV–D 

entities would far outweigh any benefit. 

Response: The fee for Federal PLS 

services is a statutory requirement 

under section 453(e)(2) of the Act. 

61. Comment: One commenter asks 

whether any fee collected for the State’s 

PLS services needs to be claimed as 

program income. 

Response: Any fee collected for the 

State’s State PLS services is considered 

program income under 45 CFR 304.50 

and must be reported. 

62. Comment: One commenter seeks 

clarification that the title: ‘‘To locate an 

individual who may be the parent of a 

child in a IV–D or non-IV–D case’’ refers 

to locating the custodial as well as 

noncustodial parent. 

Response: The final rule changes the 

title of § 302.35(d)(1) to: ‘‘To locate an 

individual with respect to a child in a 

IV–D, non-IV–D, IV–B, or IV–E case’’ in 

order to better reflect the statutory 

language in section 453(a)(2)(A) of the 

Act. This section covers locating both 

the custodial as well as the noncustodial 

parent. 

63. Comment: One commenter asks 

that the following ‘‘purpose’’ be added 

to § 302.35(d)(1): The State PLS shall 

locate individuals for the purpose of: 

facilitating informed and timely 

decisions about child welfare and 

permanency. The rationale is that 

locating parents for IV–B/IV–E purposes 

goes beyond just ‘‘establishing 

parentage’’ or ‘‘determining who has or 

may have parental rights to a child’’ as 

the language in the proposed rule 

currently reads. Another commenter 

asks if ‘‘for determining who has or may 

have parental rights with respect to a 

child’’ allow child welfare staff in the 

IV–B/IV–E agencies to request the IV–D 

program to locate and release address 

information for the purpose of 

placement of a child? 

Response: We have inserted reference 

to title IV–B and IV–E to § 302.35(d)(1) 

to make clear that those agencies have 

access to State PLS locate functions for 

the purposes stated. The purpose of 

‘‘determining who has or may have 

parental rights to a child’’ could be 

related to permanency planning. The 

language used is that which is stated in 

section 453 of the Act. To the second 

question, only persons as authorized 

under section 453(a)(2)(A) of the Act 

may request the IV–D program to locate 

and release address information for the 

purpose of placement of a child. 

64. Comment: Section 302.35(d)(1) 

states: the State PLS shall locate 

individuals for the purpose of 

establishing parentage, or establishing, 

setting the amount of, modifying, or 

enforcing child support obligations or 

for determining who has or may have 

parental rights with respect to a child. 

For these purposes, only information 

available through the Federal PLS or the 

State PLS may be provided. This 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 56433 

information is limited to Social Security 

Number(s), most recent address, 

employer name and address, employer 

identification number, wages or other 

income from, and benefits of, 

employment, including rights to, or 

enrollment in, health care coverage, or 

asset and debt information. One 

commenter questions why there is a 

restriction that ‘‘for these purposes, only 

information available through the 

Federal PLS or the State PLS may be 

provided* * *’’? 

Response: This restriction exists 

because § 302.35(d)(1) does not cover or 

authorize access to child support 

information on States’ automated 

systems (which is addressed in 45 CFR 

Part 307). This section addresses 

Federal and State PLS use for IV–D and 

non-IV–D purposes. 

65. Comment: Under § 302.35(d)(1), 

Federal PLS or State PLS information 

may be provided—but one commenter 

wants clarification as to whom this 

information can be provided—his/her 

own program or another State IV–D 

program? 

Response: Authorized persons 

include any State or local agency 

providing IV–D services as well as an 

authorized person identified in 

§ 302.35(c). 

66. Comment: One commenter asks: 

does the phrase ‘‘for determining who 

has or may have parental rights with 

respect to a child’’ include grandparents 

or other persons who may have 

‘‘parental rights’’? 

Response: No, section 453(c)(3) of the 

Act prevents this interpretation and 

means the parent of a child who would 

have a legal obligation to provide child 

support. 

67. Comment: One commenter asks 

that the section regarding the State 

Parent Locator Service be amended to 

incorporate a family violence provision 

as follows ‘‘Subject to the requirements 

of this section, the privacy safeguards 

required under section 454(26) of the 

Act, and the family violence indicator 

requirements under § 307.11(f)(1)(x) of 

this chapter, the State PLS shall disclose 

the following information to authorized 

persons for authorized purposes.’’ 

Response: There is reference to 

section 454(26) of the Act in § 302.35(e): 

Subject to the requirements of this 

section and the privacy safeguards 

required under section 454(26) of the 

Act, the State PLS shall disclose the 

following information to authorized 

persons for authorized purposes. We 

have included reference to the domestic 

violence indicator in §§ 302.35(e) and 

303.21. 

Section 303.3, Location of Noncustodial 

Parents in IV–D cases 

1. Comment: One commenter 

recommends changing the title of this 

section to include custodial parents as 

well as noncustodial parents (since the 

intent of §§ 302.35(a)(1) and 303.3 is to 

include custodial parents). Another 

commenter says that if the heading of 

this section is intended to only apply to 

noncustodial parents, the commenter 

has no concern with this as long as he 

or she can use the State PLS and other 

locate sources to locate custodial 

parents and children under § 302.35. If 

custodial parents and children are 

brought under § 303.3, the commenter 

asks that the applicability of the 

requirements, as they relate to custodial 

parents and children, be at the State’s 

discretion. Yet another commenter seeks 

confirmation of whether there are 

specific location requirements for 

custodial parents. The commenter 

believes that the specific location 

requirements of proposed rule § 303.3 

are more appropriately limited to 

noncustodial parents. 

Response: Section 303.3 only applies 

to locating the noncustodial parent. 

There are many instances in which 

States will have to locate custodial 

parents and children, e.g., when 

requested and authorized, or to enable 

disbursement of collections. A State 

may choose to use the same approach as 

set in § 303.3 to do so but it is not 

mandated. 

2. Comment: One commenter seeks 

confirmation that Federal Financial 

Participation (FFP) will be made 

available to modify computer system 

functionality and provide on-going 

services to comply with the mandate to 

provide locate services for non-IV–D 

cases and believes FFP is appropriate 

and necessary. 

Response: FFP is available to modify 

computer system functionality and 

provide ongoing services to comply 

with the mandate to provide locate 

services for non-IV–D cases. 

3. Comment: One commenter notes 

that when the title was changed from 

‘‘location of absent parents’’ to ‘‘location 

of noncustodial parents’’ the meaning of 

the section was changed and as a result, 

tens of thousands of law-abiding 

parents’ information is in State PLS, 

Federal PLS and National Directory of 

Child Support Orders databases. 

Response: The use of the term 

noncustodial parent in lieu of absent 

parent was made via regulatory changes 

in 1999 to reflect the same change made 

in the statute. The change was made to 

reflect that noncustodial parents are not 

(or should not be) absent from their 

children’s lives. 

4. Comment: One commenter asks for 

clarification regarding what the 

differences are between searching State 

databases for information (which is 

encouraged) and releasing information 

from the system (which is prohibited). 

The commenter believes the sentence in 

§ 303.3(b)(1) ‘‘Use appropriate location 

sources such as the Federal PLS; 

interstate location networks; local 

officials and employees administering 

public assistance * * *’’ conflicts with 

proposed § 302.35(a)(2)(ii) which states 

that the State PLS would not be able to, 

in response to a non-IV–D request, 

release information from the statewide 

system. 

Response: There is no conflict 

because § 303.3 applies only to IV–D 

cases and to locate efforts by the State 

IV–D agency in those cases. The 

restrictions on release of IV–D systems 

data does not apply to the IV–D agency 

or its use of program data for IV–D 

program purposes. The release of 

information in the statewide systems is 

restricted by section 454A of the Act. 

5. Comment: One commenter asks 

whether the Federal response changes 

(see comment #4 above) based on a 

State’s opinion that recipients of food 

stamp benefits must cooperate with the 

IV–D program. 

Response: If there is a IV–D case 

involving a food stamp recipient who is 

required to cooperate with the IV–D 

agency, access to data on the statewide 

automated system is authorized for 

authorized persons and IV–D purposes. 

6. Comment: One commenter urges 

the agency to disclose to the public 

what tools and data sources are going to 

be employed to locate individuals. It is 

suggested that these tools and data 

sources be disclosed in the Federal 

Register, giving individuals time to 

comment on the accuracy and reliability 

of the tools used. 

Response: States may disclose 

information regarding State tools and 

data sources. The Systems of Record 

used by the Federal PLS, the National 

Directory of New Hires and the Federal 

Case Registry, are published in the 

Federal Register and updated as 

necessary in accordance with Federal 

law. 

Section 303.20, Minimum 

Organizational and Staffing 

Requirements 

1. Comment: One commenter is 

troubled about the lack of actual 

standards regarding proper staffing of 

the State PLS. In particular, the 

investigative process behind non-IV–D 

requests will not be adequately staffed 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

56434 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

without some guidance, especially 

considering budget cuts. 

Response: The State determines how 

the State PLS is operated and there are 

various degrees of automation for access 

of data. We do not think it is 

appropriate to regulate this because of 

the different State PLS operations that 

take place among the States. 

Section 303.21, Safeguarding and 

Disclosure of Confidential Information 

1. Comment: One commenter asks 

why the Office has chosen to issue 

safeguarding rules for IV–D data now if 

it did not do so before. In most States 

there is an established body of privacy 

law that governs access to personal data 

maintained by State agencies and limits 

its use and disclosure; and at the time 

PRWORA was enacted, there were no 

discussions about preempting such 

bodies of State law by Federal statute. 

Response: States requested guidance 

regarding access to data because of the 

myriad of access requirements and 

prohibitions enacted as part of 

PRWORA. The requirements of section 

454(8) of the Act state that States ‘‘shall 

* * * disclose only information 

described in sections 453 and 463 to the 

authorized persons specified in such 

sections for the purpose specified in 

such sections.’’ 

2. Comment: One commenter raises 

concern regarding use of the word 

‘‘confidential’’ and recommends that 

‘‘personal identifying’’ information be 

substituted for ‘‘confidential’’ as it better 

captures the meaning of the information 

discussed in these proposed regulations. 

Response: We believe the term 

‘‘confidential’’ which is used in the 

statute is more consistent and 

appropriate for implementing the 

regulation. 

3. Comment: One commenter requests 

that, within the definition of 

‘‘confidential information’’, 

‘‘employment information’’ be changed 

to ‘‘employer name and address’’ in 

order to be less broad and more 

consistent with § 302.35. 

Response: Access to data through the 

Federal PLS and the State PLS in 

§ 302.35 is not restricted to employer 

name and address. 

4. Comment: One commenter requests 

a specific list of factors by which an 

individual can be identified because the 

phrase ‘‘not limited to’’ in § 303.21(a) is 

vague. As currently written, a State 

could violate the regulation or get 

differing interpretations by different 

workers. Suggested change: 

‘‘Confidential information means any 

information relating to a specified 

individual or an individual who can be 

identified by reference through any 

other nonconfidential source by 

reference to one or more factors specific 

to him or her, including, but not limited 

to, the individuals SSN, residential or 

mailing addresses, employment 

information, and financial information. 

Excluded as factors specific to him or 

her are numbers unique to the 

computerized child support 

enforcement system for individuals, as 

such a number cannot be used as an 

identifying factor outside of access to 

the confidential computerized child 

support enforcement system.’’ 

Response: We have not included this 

clarification in the regulation. Since the 

State establishes the IV–D case numbers 

and determines when and how they are 

used, we are unable to conclude that 

such numbers could not be identifying 

information. We question why there 

would be a need to release IV–D case 

numbers to an entity outside the 

administration of the IV–D program. 

5. Comment: One commenter 

questions the intent of § 303.21(a) and 

recommends allowing States to release 

payment-related information in 

accordance with State law. The 

commenter believes the last sentence 

‘‘the amount of support ordered and the 

amount of support collection are not 

considered confidential information for 

purposes of this section’’ opens up the 

IV–D agency to having to provide 

payment records to anyone who makes 

a request whether or not the requestor 

is associated with the case or intends to 

use the information for child support 

related purposes. One commenter says 

the definition of ‘‘confidential 

information’’ does not include the 

support-ordered amount or the amount 

of a support collection. Does this mean 

that if the IV–D agency/SDU is 

approached by an outside entity or 

‘‘interested third party’’ who wants the 

names and collections of persons, that 

the IV–D agency/SDU is not prohibited 

from providing such information? 

(Assume the third party is not able to 

help IV–D program establish and 

enforce.) What if the interested third 

party has a name and wants to know the 

corresponding charges and payments 

against the obligation? One commenter 

is concerned with the last sentence in 

§ 303.21(a) that appears to make 

payment histories and arrearage records, 

which contain amounts of support 

ordered and collection amounts, a part 

of the public record, and would like 

clarification as to the difference between 

that and ‘‘financial information’’ which 

is confidential. The commenter does not 

understand the meaning of this apparent 

contradiction. 

Response: We agree that the language 

in the proposed rule is confusing. We 

deleted the language ‘‘The amount of 

support ordered and the amount of a 

support collection are not considered 

confidential information for purposes of 

this section.’’ Interested third party may 

not receive payment histories and 

arrearage records. 

6. Comment: One commenter asks: in 

order to balance the need for accurate 

payment records and meet IV–D and IRS 

requirements, is it acceptable to show 

an IRS payment amount in these 

payment records, but not to identify the 

payment as an IRS receipt? 

Response: We believe it is acceptable 

for child support purposes but this is 

ultimately governed by Internal 

Revenue Service Code. 

7. Comment: One commenter believes 

that if the source of the information on 

the document to be released cannot, on 

the face of the document, be linked to 

the Federal PLS, Internal Revenue 

Service (IRS), the National Directory of 

New Hires (NDNH), or other protected 

source, there is no need to restrict 

release of a copy of a document that is 

a matter of public record. 

Response: We disagree. The statutory 

provisions restrict disclosure of specific 

information whether or not the source is 

identified. 

8. Comment: One commenter asks 

that the following sentence be added to 

the end of § 303.21(a): ‘‘Information 

required by state law to be released to 

designated persons or entities is not 

considered ‘confidential’ if the 

information has been independently 

verified or furnished from a source that 

is not protected by Title IV–D of the 

Social Security Act.’’ 

Response: The statement as proposed 

is too broad because it could be 

interpreted to include personal 

identifying information on the statewide 

automated system. 

9. Comment: One commenter would 

like confirmation that an individual’s 

name would be considered 

‘‘confidential information’’ as it would 

be information relating to a specific 

individual who could be identified. If 

the individual’s name is confidential 

and the State is not able to release the 

name, under what circumstances could 

we release the amount of support 

ordered/collected without the name? 

Response: Confidential information 

about individuals may not be disclosed 

outside the administration of the IV–D 

program. The State could release 

aggregate amounts of support collected 

in the State—e.g., $X for FY 2006. 

10. Comment: One commenter would 

like noted that if a IV–D program 

remains unable, under IRS rules, to 

release the amount of the Federal Tax 

Refund Offset payment to non-IV–D 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 56435 

entities, the program is severely 

hampered in our ability to report 

collection obligation compliance 

information to courts, custodial parties, 

etc. 

Response: We continue to work with 

the Department of the Treasury 

regarding the release of offset collection 

information. The Department of 

Treasury has offered to the Congress 

suggested legislation that would amend 

the Internal Revenue Code regarding 

this concern and the Department of 

Health and Human Services supports 

the proposal. 

11. Comment: One commenter is 

concerned that the requirement that 

‘‘any official with whom a cooperative 

agreement * * * has been entered into 

* * *’’ may not disclose confidential 

information received from the IV–D 

agency applies to agreements with the 

Clerks of Courts. Documents filed with 

the court, which have not been sealed, 

are open to inspection by such parties 

as the parties’ creditors, commercial 

information brokers, and newspaper 

reporters. OCSE needs to recognize that 

this ‘‘open records’’ type of disclosure is 

permissible for Clerks of Courts despite 

this regulation. 

Response: Section 454(26) of the Act 

requires IV–D agencies to have in effect 

safeguards, applicable to all confidential 

information relating to proceedings or 

actions to establish paternity or to 

establish, modify or enforce support, 

that are designed to protect the privacy 

rights of the parties; and 45 CFR 

302.12(a)(3) requires that those who 

receive information (such as through 

cooperative agreements) shall abide by 

those safeguards, because they are 

carrying out functions for the State IV– 

D agency. However, this regulation does 

not prohibit the disclosure of 

documents filed with the court, which 

have not been sealed and are open to 

inspection by such parties as the parties’ 

creditors, commercial information 

brokers, and newspaper reporters. 

12. Comment: One commenter notes 

the general rule prohibiting disclosure 

of confidential information has an 

exception ‘‘as authorized by the Act and 

implementing regulations * * *.’’ 

Which implementing regulations does 

this refer to? 

Response: Title IV–D regulations at 45 

CFR Parts 301–309 are the 

‘‘implementing regulations’’ referenced. 

13. Comment: Several commenters 

would like clarification regarding the 

provision to not disclose confidential 

information obtained ‘‘in connection 

with the performance of IV–D functions 

outside the administration of the IV–D 

program.’’ What do these ‘‘IV–D 

functions outside of the administration 

of the IV–D program’’ refer to? 

Clarification is needed in order to reflect 

reality that information about the 

noncustodial parent may be used in any 

way necessary to establish paternity or 

establish, modify or enforce a child 

support order. 

Response: We have clarified the intent 

of the language by restating it to read 

‘‘may not disclose any confidential 

information, obtained in connection 

with the performance of IV–D functions, 

outside the administration of the IV–D 

program.’’ 

14. Comment: One commenter is 

concerned that the Supplementary 

Information section of this proposed 

rule adds a limitation not stated in the 

actual rule by saying ‘‘the IV–D program 

may only disclose the minimum amount 

of confidential information needed for 

the purpose provided.’’ 

Response: We have deleted the 

sentence ‘‘In making a disclosure under 

this provision, the IV–D program only 

disclose the minimum amount of 

confidential information needed for the 

purpose provided’’ as stated in the 

preamble describing Section 2: 

Safeguarding and Disclosure of 

Confidential Information. 

15. Comment: Two commenters 

believe § 303.21(d) is very restrictive, 

adds undue complexity to IV–D 

disclosure policies, and places an undue 

burden on States. For example, unless 

released within the purpose of the IV– 

D program, the State would need to 

figure out how to withhold IV–D 

information from courts without 

compromising the court’s ability to 

administer the court case. 

Response: Disclosure of necessary 

information to the courts needed for 

purposes of the IV–D program is 

authorized except as limited by Section 

6103 of the Internal Revenue Code. 

(Also see Q and A #10). 

16. Comment: One commenter asks 

that § 303.21(d) focus on specifying 

when disclosure of information to other 

government programs is permitted and 

for what purposes. 

Response: Section 303.21(d)(2) and (3) 

address circumstances under which 

information may be disclosed and for 

what purposes. 

17. Comment: One commenter is 

concerned that the section on 

authorized disclosures is made in such 

a general manner that most 

administrators responsible for 

safeguarding data privacy would have a 

great deal of difficulty making all the 

inferences required to actually share 

data. 

Response: We have redesigned 

Appendix A for clarity. We reorganized 

it so it is laid out by authorized person 

followed by authorized purpose. We 

have developed a new Appendix B 

which addresses locate services in 

connection with enforcement or 

determination of child custody and in 

cases of parental kidnapping of a child. 

18. Comment: One commenter asks 

about the process of releasing 

confidential information in accordance 

with § 303.21(d)(1) under which 

information may be released ‘‘to such 

person or persons designated by the 

individual to whom the information 

relates or who is the custodial parent or 

legal guardian of a child * * *.’’ Should 

the designation be written or verbal? 

Are there time restrictions to the 

designation? Another commenter is 

concerned that § 303.21(d)(1) would 

require release of confidential 

information to anyone the individual 

designates, even though State statute 

allows only for minimal information to 

be released. The commenter 

recommends that the proposed rule be 

changed to not require release of the 

information and instead say 

‘‘information may be released unless 

prohibited under State statute.’’ 

Response: As indicated earlier in the 

preamble, this paragraph was removed 

as a separate authorized disclosure 

because under paragraph (c), disclosure 

to an individual would be allowed for 

IV–D purposes and would be governed 

by any safeguarding provision in State 

law as well. 

19. Comment: One commenter 

requests that the term ‘‘shall’’ be 

replaced with ‘‘may’’ because it is 

appropriate for States to have the 

flexibility to address, at the State level, 

how they respond to requests from an 

individual to release confidential 

information. For example, they would 

want to be able to determine, in certain 

situations, that it would be appropriate 

for them to deal directly with the 

customer, rather than a designee. 

Response: See answer to #18. 

20. Comment: One commenter thinks 

the rule should make clear that a 

custodial parent or legal guardian may 

obtain information about the child in a 

case and may authorize release of 

information about the child. 

Response: This language has been 

removed. See answer to #18. 

21. Comment: One commenter would 

like to strike the prohibition against 

providing confidential information 

about an individual to any other 

individual involved in the case. 

Response: The Federal and State IV– 

D programs are responsible for 

protecting sensitive personal 

information and broad authority as 

suggested by the commenter is 

inappropriate. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

56436 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

22. Comment: One commenter 

believes the ability to provide locate 

information to a non-IV–D requestor 

conflicts with the broad prohibition 

against disclosing ‘‘confidential’’ 

information about one individual to 

another person involved in the case (as 

proposed in § 303.21(d)(1)). Several 

commenters are concerned that 

§ 303.21(d)(2) creates a potential danger 

for overuse of this broad discretion. The 

proposed rule would essentially grant 

wide-open access to all the records and 

databases available to State child 

support programs, without any realistic 

ability for States to monitor use of this 

confidential data. 

Response: Proposed § 303.21(d)(1) has 

been removed from the final rule. 

Section 303.21(d)(2) (now 

§ 303.21(d)(1)) has been limited to the 

specific programs which have been 

designated by the Secretary. These 

programs also have safeguarding rules. 

23. Comment: There were several 

commenters who questioned the 

mandatory rather than permissive 

disclosures in § 303.21(d)(2). One 

commenter wants to know why it is 

written as a mandate for the State IV– 

D program to disclose confidential 

information to all entities listed and 

believes the ‘‘permissive disclosure’’ 

allowed prior to February 1999 was 

more appropriate than a mandated 

disclosure. Another commenter would 

like the phrase ‘‘must’’ changed to 

‘‘may’’ in § 303.21(d)(2) because the 

commenter believes a State should be 

authorized to disclose information and 

that it should not be a requirement to 

disclose the information. Such a change 

would also eliminate the need for the 

‘‘to the extent that it does not interfere 

with the IV–D program meeting its own 

obligation’’ language in the same 

sentence. Three commenters point out 

that § 303.21(d)(2)(ii) would require IV– 

D agencies to report child abuse (or at 

least give the appearance of such), 

rather than making this reporting 

discretionary. 

Response: Former § 303.21 

Safeguarding information, was removed 

with passage of Public Law 104–93. 

PRWORA was more permissive. 

Therefore, we have changed the 

language in § 303.21(d) from ‘‘must’’ to 

‘‘may’’ and have added ‘‘upon request’’ 

for clarity at the beginning of paragraph 

(1). 

24. Comment: One commenter 

appreciates the fact this regulation does 

not mandate the manner or the 

timeframes by which the IV–D program 

must respond to authorized requestors. 

States must have this flexibility. 

Response: We are committed to State 

flexibility to the extent allowable and to 

our Federal/State/Tribal partnership. 

25. Comment: Is it appropriate that 

Tribal agencies be authorized to have 

access to data under § 303.21 as 

discussed in the applicable preamble 

part? 

Response: Tribal IV–D agencies are 

included in § 303.21(d)(1) because they 

are agencies administering programs 

under title IV–A and IV–D of the Act. 

However, for clarity we have included 

specific reference to Tribal programs 

under title IV–A of the Act in 

§ 303.21(d)(1). 

26. Comment: One commenter seeks 

confirmation that this section permits 

Federal or State auditors, or other 

agencies with oversight responsibilities, 

to access confidential information or 

IV–D case-specific information. 

Response: Authority for access to 

information for purposes of the 

administration of the plan or program 

approved under title IV–D of the Act 

includes audits conducted by Federal or 

State auditors, or other agencies with 

oversight responsibility. 

27. Comment: Do ‘‘under 

circumstances which indicate that the 

child’s health or welfare is threatened’’ 

include a release to law enforcement 

agencies? Does the language of this 

proposed regulation allow us to release 

information from our child support files 

in response to an AMBER Alert? 

Response: Based on received 

comments, we have deleted the 

language in § 303.21(d) as stated in the 

NPRM that would have allowed the 

State IV–D program to release 

information to law enforcement 

agencies upon request. However, the 

information can be released to the IV– 

B or IV–E agency where it is necessary 

to carry out a State IV–B or IV–E 

function. 

28. Comment: One commenter 

requests that the phrase ‘‘best interest of 

the child’’ be inserted because this 

language is more appropriate than 

‘‘under circumstances which indicate 

that the child’s health or welfare is 

threatened.’’ 

Response: See response to Question 

#28 immediately above. 

29. Comment: One commenter seeks 

clarification as to whether the proposed 

rule would limit the use of SDNH 

information outside of the IV–D 

program, subject to the exceptions 

specified in § 303.21(d)(2). The 

commenter does not want restrictions 

on the use of SDNH data. This data is 

used to collect taxes and to detect and 

prevent fraud in a wide range of 

programs. We are unaware of any 

Federal authority for limiting use of this 

State data. In fact, section 453A(h)(3) of 

the Act explicitly requires States to 

share State new hire data with ‘‘State 

agencies operating employment security 

and worker’s compensation programs.’’ 

If OCSE intends to impose these strict 

limitations on the use of SDNH data, 

further discussion of this proposal with 

States is warranted. 

Response: Safeguarding of SDNH data 

is determined by whether or not the 

database is part of the statewide child 

support enforcement automated system. 

Any information in the statewide 

system is protected and its access 

limited as set forth in § 307.13. If the 

SDNH is housed in a separate agency, 

these restrictions do not apply to nonIV–D use. 

30. Comment: One commenter 

believes the intent of this rule, as 

expressed in the preamble, does not fit 

with requiring independent verification 

of Federal Case Registry and National 

Directory of New Hires information. 

Response: Restricted access to Federal 

Case Registry (FCR) and National 

Directory of New Hires (NDNH) 

information is statutory. Independent 

verification is a means to enable a State 

to disclose this information for non-IV– 

D purposes by changing the source of 

the data through verification. 

31. Comment: One commenter would 

like an exception made under 

§ 303.21(d)(3) for title XIX (Medicaid 

programs). The prohibition on 

disclosing unverified FCR and NDNH 

information contradicts the mandate in 

42 U.S.C. 654A(f)(3) to share IV–D 

system information with Title XIX 

programs. 

Response: Section 454A(f)(3) 

authorized limited sharing of 

information on the title IV–D automated 

system to title XIX agencies. There is a 

separate statute at section 453(h) and (i) 

that explicitly restricts access to NDNH 

and FCR data and does not authorize 

access to such data by title XIX 

agencies. Section 303.21(d)(3) addresses 

disclosure of information obtained from 

the IRS or Federal PLS and not State 

systems data. 

32. Comment: Two commenters are 

confused by the requirement to 

independently verify information the 

IV–D program receives from NDNH or 

FCR. How would such information be 

independently verified? Is this rule 

proposing that the State IV–D agency 

would have to contact the other State to 

verify the FCR information and NDNH 

information? 

Response: This rule is not requiring or 

advocating the IV–D agency to 

independently verify information 

received from the NDNH or the FCR. It 

merely describes the circumstances 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 56437 

under which such data may be 

disclosed to persons not specified in 

section 453 of the Act (non-IV–D 

purposes). For example, assume a State 

IV–D agency submits an address 

received from the NDNH for postal 

verification. Once the postal verification 

is complete, that information has been 

independently verified and can be 

released. The source of the address is 

the postal service, not the NDNH. 

33. Comment: One commenter 

strongly recommends deleting the 

provision in § 303.21(d)(3) from the 

proposed regulation restricting access to 

NDNH, FCR, and IRS data. 

Response: Because these restrictions 

are statutory, they cannot be deleted. 

34. Comment: While one commenter 

recognizes that Federal law requires 

restriction on redisclosure of IRS data 

and has no objection to this aspect, the 

commenter is unaware of any basis in 

Federal statute for requiring 

independent verification of information 

from NDNH, FCR, or MSFIDM. 

Response: Federal statute is explicit 

regarding authorized disclosure of 

NDNH and FCR data. Section 453 of the 

Act specifies that information from the 

Federal PLS (of which the NDNH and 

FCR are a part) may only be released to 

authorized persons and for certain 

purposes. This rule is not requiring the 

IV–D program to independently verify 

information received from the NDNH or 

the FCR. It merely describes the 

circumstances under which such data 

may be disclosed to persons not 

specified in section 453 of the Act (nonIV–D purposes). 

35. Comment: One commenter notes 

that a State currently accepts 

information from the FCR and NDNH as 

‘‘independently verified’’ and takes 

action based upon that information. 

This provision (requiring that the State 

in itself independently verify such data) 

will require reprogramming systems and 

will cause operational burden on States. 

Response: This rule is not requiring 

the IV–D agency to independently verify 

information received from the NDNH or 

the FCR. It merely describes the 

circumstances under which such data 

may be disclosed to persons not 

specified in section 453 of the Act (nonIV–D purposes). In fact, we encourage 

IV–D agencies to take automated action 

based on the NDNH or the FCR. 

36. Comment: One commenter asks 

for clarification on whether the State 

would be able to share locate and 

paternity establishment information on 

a State’s IV–D system through an 

automated interface with Child Welfare, 

Foster Care, and Medicaid agencies. 

Response: Yes, under certain 

circumstances and with certain 

limitations. See §§ 303.21 and 307.13 

37. Comment: Three commenters are 

concerned that the independent 

verification requirement will impede a 

State’s ability to share information in a 

timely, efficient and automated manner. 

In particular, the requirement will 

impede State’s ability to assist State IV– 

E and Medicaid agencies in recovering 

public health insurance costs and 

locating parents. At a minimum, States 

will need to segregate NDNH, FCR, and 

MSFIDM data so that they do not 

transmit this information to State IV–E 

and Medicaid agencies pending 

independent verification. This will 

require additional automated system 

development, at a cost to both States 

and the Federal government, and will 

impede the functioning of automated 

interfaces with other State agencies. 

Funds and resources devoted to 

programming these requirements could 

better be used on system development 

that supports the core mission of the 

child support program. 

Response: This rule is not requiring 

the IV–D agency to independently verify 

information received from the NDNH or 

the FCR. It merely describes the 

circumstances under which such data 

may be disclosed to persons not 

specified in section 453 of the Act (for 

non-IV–D purposes). 

38. Comment: One commenter 

believes the regulation fails to provide 

guidance to IV–D agencies regarding the 

use of Federal tax offset amounts and 

asks: how can a IV–D agency 

‘‘independently verify’’ the amount of a 

Federal tax refund intercept? 

Response: There is no way to 

independently verify Federal tax refund 

offset information. We continue to work 

with the Department of the Treasury 

and the Congress to resolve this issue. 

39. Comment: One commenter notes 

the regulation requires that authorized 

disclosures, except to IV–A agencies, 

cannot include information obtained 

from the FCR, unless independently 

verified. Does this mean that 

information about the noncustodial 

parent’s access to military medical 

benefits obtained from the Defense Data 

Management Center (DMDC) and 

transmitted to the FCR is confidential? 

Response: States acquire DMDC 

through a FCR transaction but the data 

is not part of the FCR database. 

Information about the noncustodial 

parent’s access to military medical 

benefits is thus not subject to the 

‘‘independent verification’’ requirement. 

40. Comment: One commenter would 

like confirmation that § 303.21(d)(3) 

means that information may not be 

shared with a custodial parent seeking 

information about medical support 

benefits available to a child but that it 

may be released to the IV–A agency. 

Response: There is no restriction on 

sharing information from the Federal 

PLS about medical support benefits 

with custodial parents in IV–D cases. 

Such information is not received from 

the NDNH or the FCR. 

41. Comment: Four commenters note 

that the requirement for independent 

verification of NDNH and FCR 

information prior to disclosure could 

have the following consequences: delay 

in sending out income withholding 

notices (will not meet 2-day Federal 

timeframe); delay to families and 

children in getting payments; burden on 

employers who may be required to 

furnish additional employment 

verification to the SDNH; require 

automated system programming changes 

since the proposed rule would require 

segregation of NDNH and FCR and 

change to systems automatic processing 

of New Hire information; is an 

unacceptable burden on IV–D agencies 

(unfunded mandate); will impair an 

agency’s ability to assist other State 

entities authorized to receive such 

information; and will complicate the 

process because depending on purposes 

for which information is to be used, 

sometimes it must be verified and 

sometimes not. 

Response: This rule is not requiring 

the IV–D agency to independently verify 

information received from the NDNH or 

the FCR before it is used in the 

administration of the IV–D program. It 

merely describes the circumstances 

under which such data may be 

disclosed to persons not specified in 

section 453 of the Act (for non-IV–D 

purposes). We encourage IV–D agencies 

to take automated action based on the 

NDNH or the FCR information. 

42. Comment: One commenter 

believes that to now require 

independent verification of this data 

seems to be contradictory to previously 

stated policy by the Federal OCSE (i.e., 

DCL–02–22 that offers the use of the 

NDNH, and MSFIDM as better sources 

than 1099 information). 

Response: Independent verification is 

not being required. It is merely a 

condition that must be met if the State 

wishes to use or disclose information for 

non-IV–D purposes to nonauthorized 

persons. This applies only to non-IV–D 

purposes. There is no such restriction in 

IV–D cases. 

43. Comment: One commenter said 

the State does not routinely track the 

‘‘source’’ of most information and thinks 

the administrative burden involved with 

sharing information under the proposed 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

56438 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

restrictions may be too great for the 

program to overcome. Another 

commenter indicated that the State’s 

IV–D automated system is required to 

identify the source of address and 

employment information the IV–D 

agency receives from automated 

sources. If IV–D staff independently 

verified NDNH information, the staff 

would have to change the source of 

confidential information and then 

neither State nor Federal Child Support 

Enforcement agencies would be able to 

calculate how many successful ‘‘hits’’ 

the State is receiving from NDNH or 

FCR. 

Response: The source of information 

is a recommended but not required data 

element in State child support systems. 

However, most States do identify the 

source of information on their systems 

to meet other tracking requirements 

such as tracking responses from each 

automated location source. 

44. Comment: One commenter 

requests that if the Office insists on 

including the restriction that prohibits 

disclosure of NDNH and FCR 

information to title IV, XIX and XXI 

agencies, the Office insert language to 

clarify ‘‘Except for SPLS disclosure 

authorized under § 302.35(c)(5), the IV– 

D program may not disclose FCR and 

NDNH data to IV–B and IV–E agencies.’’ 

Response: Because of authority in 

section 453(c) of the Act, in 

§ 307.13(a)(4)(iii) we have indicated that 

NDNH and FCR information is available 

to IV–B and IV–E agencies for the 

purposes set forth in section 453 of the 

Act. 

45. Comment: One commenter would 

like the Office to recognize that the 

mandate to disclose to Title IV–B and 

IV–E agencies under § 303.21(d)(2) and 

the prohibition on that mandated 

disclosure of NDNH and FCR 

information to IV–B and IV–E agencies 

without first independently verifying 

under (d)(3) will create confusion 

because under 42 U.S.C. 653(c)(4), IV– 

B, and IV–E agencies are authorized 

persons for receiving NDNH and FCR 

information for authorized purposes 

without independent verification for the 

limited purposes of establishing 

parentage and support. 

Response: Section 453(c) of the Act 

provides authority for IV–B and IV–E 

agencies to receive NDNH and FCR 

information without independent 

verification. 

46. Comment: One commenter notes 

that § 303.21(e) makes it clear that a 

legislative body or governmental 

committee cannot obtain the release of 

information pertaining to an individual 

without consent of the individual. 

Please verify that it is up to the State to 

determine the nature of the consent of 

the individual (e.g., written, verbal, or 

notarized permission or a State could 

deny permission entirely?). 

Response: To the extent that an 

individual in a IV–D case submits a 

request to a legislator or legislative body 

concerning his or her IV–D case, the IV– 

D agency may disclose the information 

necessary for the response because the 

inquiry relates to the administration of 

the IV–D program and is authorized 

under paragraph (c). As mentioned 

earlier in the preamble, we deleted the 

language under paragraph (e) 

Safeguards, that ‘‘safeguards shall also 

prohibit disclosure to any committee or 

legislative body (Federal, State, or local) 

of any confidential information, unless 

authorized by the individual as 

specified in paragraph (d) of this 

section.’’ 

47. Comment: One commenter, to 

emphasize the requirement that States 

establish the safeguards for victims of 

family violence required by the statute 

and by the automated system regulation, 

requested the following sentence be 

added to the end of § 303.21(e): ‘‘These 

safeguards shall also include 

prohibitions against the release of 

information when the State has 

reasonable evidence of domestic 

violence or child abuse against a party 

or a child and that the disclosure of 

such information could be harmful to 

the party or the child, as required by 

section 454(26) of the Act, and shall 

include use of the family violence 

indicator required under 

§ 307.11(f)(1)(x) of this chapter.’’ 

Response: We agree with the 

commenter and have revised § 303.21(e) 

accordingly. 

48. Comment: One commenter 

recommends adding a qualification to 

§ 303.21(e) that the information may be 

released where members of the 

legislature want information with 

respect to a IV–D case because of a 

constituent request on a particular case. 

Response: Addition of a qualification 

is not necessary. Under § 303.21(c) such 

disclosure is allowable because it is for 

IV–D purposes. 

Appendix A to § 303.21, Safeguarding 

Confidential Information 

1. Comment: One commenter is 

concerned that Appendix A does not 

recognize that among the duties of the 

IV–D program is the duty to avoid fraud 

in publicly-funded programs. 

Response: States are responsible for 

avoiding fraud in any publicly-funded 

program. However we have no authority 

to allow access to specific data when 

prohibited or limited by Federal statute. 

2. Comment: One commenter notes 

that the preamble to the proposed rule 

and the proposed language of § 303.21 

impose an independent verification 

requirement for NDNH but not for 

SDNH data. Yet the chart in Appendix 

A following proposed § 303.21 applies 

this independent verification 

requirement to disclosure of SDNH data. 

This appears to be an error. If not, this 

requirement would be a major limitation 

on State use of State new hire data that 

has no basis in Federal law. 

Response: The chart indicates that 

independent verification is needed if 

the source of information is NDNH, 

FCR, or IRS, except that NDNH or FCR 

information may be shared with the IV– 

A, IV–B, and IV–E programs without 

verification. As mentioned earlier, we 

have redesigned Appendix A and added 

a new Appendix B and C. There is no 

requirement to independently verify 

SDNH information. 

Section 303.70, Procedures for 

Submissions to the State Parent Locator 

Service (State PLS) or the Federal Parent 

Locator Service (FPLS) 

1. Comment: One commenter 

recommends that the Office specify that 

the word ‘‘individuals’’ as used in 

paragraph (a) includes parents, putative 

fathers, children and caretaker relatives. 

Response: Section 453 of the Act 

governs whom the Federal PLS may 

attempt to locate and by cross-reference 

in section 454(8) of the Act, whom the 

State PLS may attempt to locate. Section 

453(a)(2)(A) refers to attempting to 

locate any individual ‘‘(i) who is under 

an obligation to pay child support; (ii) 

against whom such an obligation is 

sought; (iii) to whom such an obligation 

is owed, or (iv) who has or may have 

parental rights with respect to a child.’’ 

Caretaker relatives do not fit any of 

those conditions. However, we have 

substituted ‘‘parents, putative fathers, 

and children’’ for ‘‘individuals’’ in 

§ 303.20(a). 

2. Comment: One commenter would 

like the following ‘‘purpose’’ to be 

added: The State PLS shall locate 

individuals for the purpose of 

facilitating informed and timely 

decisions about child welfare and 

permanency, since locating parents for 

IV–B/IV–E purposes goes beyond just 

‘‘establishing parentage’’ or 

‘‘determining who has or may have 

parental rights to a child’’ as the 

language in the proposed rule currently 

reads. 

Response: The language in 

§ 303.70(e)(1)(i) is the authorized 

purpose as stated in section 453(a)(2) of 

the Act for the release of information to 

IV–B and IV–E State agencies and is 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 56439 

consistent with timely decisions 

regarding child welfare. 

3. Comment: One commenter would 

like the word ‘‘aid’’ changed to 

‘‘assistance as defined at 45 CFR 

260.31’’ in the proposed rule. This way, 

there will be a clear national policy in 

this area. 

Response: We have changed the word 

‘‘aid’’ to ‘‘assistance’’ as suggested by 

the commenter but did not cite the 

regulation because it may change. 

Section 307.13, Security and 

Confidentiality for Computerized 

Support Enforcement Systems in 

Operation After October 1, 1997 

1. Comment: Will more guidance be 

given to IV–D agencies regarding the 

type of information that will be needed 

by the State and Tribal agencies 

administrating programs under titles IV, 

XIX, and XXI of the Act? 

Response: We encourage IV–D 

agencies to work with other agencies to 

make such determinations. 

2. Comment: Could IV–A, XIX, and 

XXI workers have login IDs and 

passwords to the IV–D system if their 

access to the IV–D system were 

sufficiently limited to view only the 

information that those workers had the 

right to access? 

Response: It is possible but would 

require additional programming to 

ensure that the non-IV–D worker has 

access to only the authorized data 

including, as applicable, independentlyverified data. Non-IV–D workers cannot 

have direct access to the IV–D screens, 

because usually the data on a typical 

IV–D system screen may contain IRS 

and financial institution information 

3. Comment: One commenter asks for 

clarification of the phrase ‘‘outside the 

IV–D program’’ in § 307.13(a)(5). Does 

this phrase mean that the State IV–D 

agency may not disclose NDNH or FCR 

information without independent 

verification even if it is a disclosure that 

is necessary to establish, modify or 

enforce child support? Would this 

phrase prohibit the IV–D agency from 

using MSFIDM information as evidence 

in a contempt of court proceeding to 

show the delinquent obligor had assets 

but still failed to pay child support as 

ordered unless the IV–D agency first 

obtained independent verification? 

Response: Establishing, modifying or 

enforcing a child support order, or a 

court proceeding where proof is brought 

regarding the fact that a delinquent 

obligor had assets but still failed to pay 

child support, are all IV–D purposes for 

a IV–D case. Because they are IV–D 

purposes, the IV–D agency may disclose 

NDNH or FCR information and 

independent verification does not 

apply. 

4. Comment: One commenter seeks 

clarification that § 307.13(a)(5) [now 

§ 307.13(a)(4)] does not require 

independent verification of FCR and 

NDNH information. If so, the 

commenter recommends deleting this 

provision as it is administratively 

burdensome. One commenter would 

like the Office to eliminate the 

restriction that requires independent 

verification of NDNH and FCR 

information to title IV, XIX and XXI 

agencies. 

Response: Independent verification of 

NDNH and FCR information is only 

necessary for disclosure for non-IV–D 

purposes. The regulation has been 

rewritten for clarity and § 307.13(a)(4) 

requires written policies that limit 

disclosure outside the IV–D program, of 

National Directory of New Hire 

information, Federal Case Registry 

information, and IRS information that is 

restricted as specified in the Internal 

Revenue Code. Financial institution 

information cannot be shared outside 

the IV–D program. IV–A, IV–B, and IV– 

E agencies are authorized under various 

subsections of section 453 of the Act to 

receive NDNH and FCR information 

from the Federal PLS for certain 

specified purposes. Since these agencies 

are authorized to have this information, 

we are permitting the IV–D agency to 

disclose the NDNH or FCR information 

from the IV–D computerized support 

enforcement system directly to the IV– 

A, IV–B, or IV–E agency if it is being 

requested for the purpose authorized 

under section 453 of the Act. For IV–B 

and IV–E programs this includes 

establishing paternity or parental rights 

with respect to a child. 

5. Comment: One commenter seeks 

clarification as to who is responsible to 

conduct any verification. 

Response: The State IV–D agency 

must independently verify the data. 

APPENDIX A: LOCATING INDIVIDUALS THROUGH THE STATE PLSS § 302.35 

Authorized person/program Authorized purpose 

of the request 

Persons about whom 

information may be 

asked 

Sources searched 

Authorized 

information 

returned 

Limitations 1

Agent/attorney of a 

State who has the 

duty or authority to 

collect child and 

spousal support 

under the IV–D plan. 

Section 453(c)(1).

Establish paternity. 

Establish, set the 

amount, modify, or 

enforce child support obligations 

and or to facilitate 

the location of any 

individual who is 

under an obligation 

to pay child support, against whom 

such an obligation 

is sought, or to 

whom such an obligation is owed.

Noncustodial Parent

Putative Father .........

Custodial Parent .......

Children. Section 

453(a)(2)(A).

Federal Parent Locator Service.

In-state sources in 

accordance with 

State law.

Six Elements: 

Person’s Name .........

Person’s SSN ...........

Person’s address ......

Employer’s name ......

Employer’s address ..

Employer Identification Number. Section 453(a)(2)(A)(iii).

Wages, income, and 

benefits of employment, including 

health care coverage. Section 

453(a)(2)(B).

See footnote. 

Locate a parent or 

child involved in a 

non-IV–D child 

support case to 

disburse an income 

withholding collection. Section 

453(a)(2).

Type, status, location, and amount of 

assets or debts 

owed by or to the 

individual. Section 

453(a)(2)(C).

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

56440 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

APPENDIX A: LOCATING INDIVIDUALS THROUGH THE STATE PLSS § 302.35—Continued 

Authorized person/program Authorized purpose 

of the request 

Persons about whom 

information may be 

asked 

Sources searched 

Authorized 

information 

returned 

Limitations 1

Court that has the authority to issue an 

order against an NCP 

for the support and 

maintenance of child, 

or to serve as the initiating court in an action to seek a child 

support order. Section 

453(c)(2).

To facilitate the location of any individual who is under 

an obligation to 

pay child support, 

against whom such 

an obligation is 

sought, or to whom 

such an obligation 

is owed.

Noncustodial Parent

Custodial Parent .......

Putative Father .........

Child .........................

Federal Parent Locator Service.

In-state sources in 

accordance with 

State law.

Six Elements as 

above.

Wages, income, and 

benefits of employment, including 

health care coverage. Section 

453(a)(2)(B).

Type, status, location, and amount of 

assets or debts 

owed by or to the 

individual. Section 

453(a)(2)(C).

No Internal Revenue 

Service (IRS) information provided for 

non-IV–D cases 

unless independently verified. 

No Multistate Financial Institution Data 

Match (MSFIDM) 

and no State Financial Institution 

Data Match (FIDM) 

information provided for non-IV–D 

cases. 

Locate a parent or 

child involved in a 

non-IV–D child 

support case..

No required subsequent attempts to 

locate unless there 

is a new request. 

Resident parent, legal 

guardian, attorney, or 

agent of a child not 

receiving IV–A benefits (a non-IV–D request). Section 

453(c)(3).2

To facilitate the location of any individual who is under 

an obligation to 

pay child support, 

against whom such 

an obligation is 

sought, or to whom 

such an obligation 

is owed.

Noncustodial Parent

Putative Father .........

Federal Parent Locator Service.

In-state sources in 

accordance with 

State law.

Six Elements as 

above.

Wages, income, and 

benefits of employment, including 

health care coverage. Section 

453(a)(2)(B).

Type, status, location, and amount of 

assets or debts 

owed by or to the 

individual. Section 

453(a)(2)(C).

Child not receiving 

IV–A benefits. 

No IRS Information. 

No MSFIDM and no 

State FIDM information provided for 

non-IV–D cases. 

In a non-IV–D request, attestation is 

required as specified in 

§ 302.35(c)(3)(i)– 

(iii). 

Locate a parent or 

child involved in a 

non-IV–D child 

support case.

No required subsequent attempts to 

locate unless there 

is a new request. 

State agency that is administering a Child 

and Family Services 

program (IV–B) or a 

Foster Care and 

Adoption IV–E program. Section 

453(c)(4).

To facilitate the location of any individual who has or 

may have parental 

rights with respect 

to the child. Section 453(a)(2)(iv).

Noncustodial Parent

Putative Father .........

Custodial Parent .......

Child. Section 

453(a)(2)(A).

Federal Parent Locator Service.

In-state sources in 

accordance with 

State law.

Six Elements as 

above.

Wages, income, and 

benefits of employment, including 

health care coverage.

No IRS information 

unless independently verified. 

No MSFIDM information and no State 

FIDM information 

provided. 

Type, status, location, and amount of 

assets or debts 

owed by or to the 

individual. Section 

453(a)(2)(C).

1 No information shall be disclosed if the disclosure of such information would contravene the national policy or security interests of the United 

States or the confidentiality of census data. No information shall be disclosed if the State has reasonable evidence of domestic violence or child 

abuse and the disclosure of such information could be harmful to the CP or child. See Section 453(b)(2) for release process to court or agent of 

the court. 2A Tribal IV–D program may request access to the Federal PLS under this authority. See PIQ–07–02/TPIQ–07–02, Q&R 7. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 56441 

APPENDIX B: LOCATING AN INDIVIDUAL SOUGHT IN A CHILD CUSTODY/VISITATION OR PARENTAL KIDNAPPING CASE

Type of request Authorized person/program 

Authorized purpose of the request About whom information may be 

requested 

Sources searched Authorized information returned Limitations 1

LOCATING AN INDIVIDUAL 

SOUGHT IN A 

CHILD CUSTODY OR VISITATION CASE.

Any agent or attorney of any 

State who has 

the authority/ 

duty to enforce 

a child custody 

or visitation determination. 

§ 463(d(2)(A).

Determining the 

whereabouts of 

a parent or 

child to make or 

enforce a custody or visitation determination. § 463(a)(2).

A parent or child. 

§ 463(a).

Federal Parent 

Locator Service.

In-state sources in 

accordance with 

State law.

Only the three following elements: Person’s 

address Employer’s name 

Employer’s address § 463(c).

See footnote. 

No IRS information provided. 

No MSFIDM or 

State FIDM information provided. 

A court, or agent 

of the court, 

having jurisdiction to make or 

enforce a child 

custody or visitation determination. 

§ 463(d)(2)(B).

No subsequent attempts to locate 

unless there is 

a new request. 

LOCATING AN INDIVIDUAL 

SOUGHT IN A 

PARENTAL KIDNAPPING CASE.

Agent or attorney 

of the U.S. or a 

State who has 

authority/duty to 

investigate, enforce, or prosecute the unlawful taking or 

restraint of a 

child. 

§ 463(d)(2)(C).

Determining the 

whereabouts of 

a parent or 

child to enforce 

any State or 

Federal law 

with respect to 

the unlawful 

taking or restraint of a 

child. 

§ 463(a)(1).

A parent or child. 

§ 463(a).

Federal Parent 

Locator Service.

In-state sources in 

accordance with 

State law.

Only the three following elements: Person’s 

address Employer’s name 

Employer’s address § 463(c).

See footnote. 

No IRS information provided 

No MSFIDM or 

State FIDM information provided. 

No subsequent attempts to locate 

unless there is 

a new request. 

1 No information shall be disclosed if the disclosure of such information would contravene the national policy or security interests of the United 

States or the confidentiality of census data. No information shall be disclosed if the State has reasonable evidence of domestic violence or child 

abuse and the disclosure of such information could be harmful to the CP or child. See Section 453(b)(2) for release process to court or agent of 

the court. 

APPENDIX C: AUTHORITY FOR STATE IV–D AGENCIES TO RELEASE INFORMATION TO NON-IV–D FEDERAL, STATE, AND

TRIBAL PROGRAMS

Authority Authorized purpose of 

request Authorized person/program Authorized information returned Limitations 

Sections 453 and 

454A(f)(3) of the Act, 

Section 1102 of the Act; 

and 45 CFR 307.13.

To perform State or Tribal 

agency responsibilities 

of designated programs.

State or Tribal agencies 

administering title IV, 

XIX, and XXI programs.

Confidential information 

found in automated system.

No Internal Revenue Service information unless 

independently verified. 

No MSFIDM or State 

FIDM information provided. 

No NDNH and FCR information for title XIX and 

XXI unless independently verified. 

For IV–B/IV–E, for purpose 

of section 453(a)(2) of 

the Act can have NDNH 

and FCR information 

without independent 

verification. 

—Any other purpose requires independent 

verification. 

For IV–A NDNH/FRC information for purposes of 

section 453(j) of the Act 

without independent 

verification. 

—Need verification for 

other purposes. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

56442 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

APPENDIX C: AUTHORITY FOR STATE IV–D AGENCIES TO RELEASE INFORMATION TO NON-IV–D FEDERAL, STATE, AND

TRIBAL PROGRAMS—Continued 

Authority Authorized purpose of 

request Authorized person/program Authorized information returned Limitations 

Sections 453A(h)(2) and 

1137 of the Act—State 

Directory of New Hires.

Income and eligibility 

verification purposes of 

designated programs.

State agencies administering title IV–A, Medicaid, unemployment 

compensation, food 

stamps, or other State 

programs under a plan 

approved under title I, X, 

XIV, or XVI of the Act.

SDNH information: Individual’s name, address and 

SSN; employer’s name, 

address, and Federal 

employer identification 

number.

IV. Regulatory Review 

A. Paperwork Reduction Act 

Section 302.35(c) contains an 

information collection requirement. As 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), the 

Administration for Children and 

Families submitted a copy of this 

section to the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) for its review. We 

received only one comment regarding 

the attestation; therefore in the final rule 

have not revised any language in 

§ 307.13 relating to attestation. 

1. Comment: One commenter noted 

that the Paper Reduction Act estimate of 

702 hours grossly underestimates the 

time needed to complete the 

requirements of these proposed 

regulations. Requiring State IV–D 

agencies to independently verify NDNH 

and FCR hits requires a tremendous 

amount of paperwork, time, and effort. 

Response: The regulation does not 

require independent verification. It sets 

forth the conditions for the release of 

information that the State would not be 

able to release for non-IV–D purposes 

otherwise. If the information has not 

been independently verified, it may not 

be released for non-IV–D purposes or to 

persons not specified in section 453 of 

the Act. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

The Secretary certifies that, under 5 

U.S.C. 605(b), as enacted by the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96– 

354), this rule will not result in a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The primary 

impact is on State governments. State 

governments are not considered small 

entities under the Act. 

C. Executive Order 12866 

Executive Order 12866 requires that 

regulations be reviewed to ensure that 

they are consistent with the priorities 

and principles set forth in the Executive 

Order. The Department has determined 

that this rule is consistent with these 

priorities and principles. This 

regulation responds to State requests for 

guidance on data privacy issues. 

The primary purpose of this 

regulation is to clarify requirements for 

safeguarding child support enforcement 

information by consolidating various 

statutory requirements on disclosure 

and safeguarding of information into a 

regulatory framework. There are no 

appreciable costs related to this 

regulation as the relevant statutory 

requirements have been in place for 

many years and the regulation 

substantially reflects current operating 

practices. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

Section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires 

that a covered agency prepare a 

budgetary impact statement before 

promulgating a rule that includes any 

Federal mandate that may result in the 

expenditure by State, local, and Tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any one year. 

If a covered agency must prepare a 

budgetary impact statement, section 205 

further requires that it select the most 

cost-effective and least burdensome 

alternative that achieves the objectives 

of the rule and is consistent with the 

statutory requirements. In addition, 

section 203 requires a plan for 

informing and advising any small 

governments that may be significantly 

or uniquely impacted by the rule. 

We have determined that this rule 

will not result in the expenditure by 

State, local, and Tribal governments, in 

the aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

more than $100 million in any one year. 

Accordingly, we have not prepared a 

budgetary impact statement, specifically 

addressed the regulatory alternatives 

considered, or prepared a plan for 

informing and advising any significantly 

or uniquely impacted small 

governments. 

E. Congressional Review 

This rule is not a major rule as 

defined in 5 U.S.C. chapter 8. 

F. Assessment of Federal Regulations 

and Policies on Families 

Section 654 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act of 1999 requires Federal agencies to 

determine whether a policy or 

regulation may affect family well-being. 

If the agency’s determination is 

affirmative, then the agency must 

prepare an impact assessment 

addressing seven criteria specified in 

the law. This Office has reviewed and 

determined that these regulations 

protect the confidentiality of 

information contained in the records of 

State child support enforcement 

agencies and will not have an impact on 

family well being as defined in the 

legislation. 

G. Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132 prohibits an 

agency from publishing any rule that 

has federalism implications if the rule 

either imposes substantial direct 

compliance costs on State and local 

governments and is not required by 

statute, or the rule preempts State law, 

unless the agency meets the 

consultation and funding requirements 

of section 6 of the Executive Order. This 

rule does not have federalism 

implication as defined in the Executive 

order. 

List of Subjects 

45 CFR Part 302 

Child support, Grants programs/social 

programs, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

45 CFR part 303 

Child support, Grant programs/social 

programs, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

45 CFR Part 307 

Child support, Grant programs/social 

programs, computer technology, 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 56443 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Programs No. 93.563, Child Support 

Enforcement Program.) 

Dated: April 23, 2008. 

Daniel C. Schneider, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Children and 

Families. 

Approved: June 23, 2008. 

Michael O. Leavitt, 

Secretary of Health and Human Services. 

■ Accordingly, the Department of 

Health and Human Services amends 

title 45 chapter III of the Code of Federal 

Regulations as follows: 

PART 302—STATE PLAN 

REQUIREMENTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 302 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 651 through 658, 660, 

663, 664, 666, 667, 1302, 1396a(a)(25), 

1396b(d)(2), 1396b(o), 1396b(p), 1396(k). 

■ 2. Section 302.35 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 302.35 State parent locator service. 

The State plan shall provide as 

follows: 

(a) State PLS. The IV–D agency shall 

maintain a State PLS to provide locate 

information to authorized persons for 

authorized purposes. 

(1) For IV–D cases and IV–D purposes 

by the IV–D agency. The State PLS shall 

access the Federal PLS and all relevant 

sources of information and records 

available in the State, and in other 

States as appropriate, for locating 

custodial parents, noncustodial parents, 

and children for IV–D purposes. 

(2) For authorized non-IV–D 

individuals and purposes— 

(i) The State PLS shall access and 

release information authorized to be 

disclosed under Section 453(a)(2) of the 

Act from the Federal PLS and, in 

accordance with State law, information 

from relevant in-state sources of 

information and records, as appropriate, 

for locating custodial parents, 

noncustodial parents, and children 

upon request of authorized individuals 

specified in paragraph (c) of this 

section, for authorized purposes 

specified in paragraph (d) of this 

section. 

(ii) The State PLS shall not release 

information from the computerized 

support enforcement system required 

under part 307 of this chapter, IRS 

information, or financial institution data 

match information, nor shall the State 

PLS forward a non-IV–D request to 

another State IV–D agency. 

(iii) The State PLS need not make 

subsequent location attempts if locate 

efforts fail to find the individual sought 

unless a new request is submitted. 

(b) Central State PLS requirement. 

The IV–D program shall maintain a 

central State PLS to submit requests to 

the Federal PLS. 

(c) Authorized persons. The State PLS 

shall accept requests for locate 

information only from the following 

authorized persons: 

(1) Any State or local agency or 

official providing child and spousal 

support services under the State plan; 

(2) A court that has authority to issue 

an order or to serve as the initiating 

court in an action to seek an order 

against a noncustodial parent for the 

support and maintenance of a child, or 

any agent of such court; 

(3) The resident parent, legal 

guardian, attorney, or agent of a child 

who is not receiving assistance under 

title IV–A of the Act only if the 

individual: 

(i) Attests that the request is being 

made to obtain information on, or to 

facilitate the discovery of, any 

individual in accordance with section 

453(a)(2) of the Act for the purpose of 

establishing parentage, establishing, 

setting the amount of, modifying, or 

enforcing child support obligations; 

(ii) Attests that any information 

obtained through the Federal or State 

PLS shall be used solely for these 

purposes and shall be otherwise treated 

as confidential; 

(iii) Provides evidence that the 

requestor is the parent, legal guardian, 

attorney, or agent of a child not 

receiving assistance under title IV–A, 

and if an agent of such a child, evidence 

of a valid contract that meets any 

requirements in State law or written 

policy for acting as an agent and, if a 

parent, attestation that he or she is the 

resident parent. 

(iv) Pays the fee required for Federal 

PLS services under section 453(e)(2) of 

the Act and § 303.70(f)(2)(i) of this 

chapter, if the State does not pay the fee 

itself. The State may also charge a fee 

to cover its costs of processing the 

request, which must be as close to 

actual costs as possible, so as not to 

discourage requests to use the Federal 

PLS. If the State itself pays the fee for 

use of the Federal PLS or the State PLS 

in a non-IV–D case, Federal financial 

participation is not available in those 

expenditures. 

(4) Authorized persons as defined in 

§ 303.15 of this chapter in connection 

with parental kidnapping, child custody 

or visitation cases; or 

(5) A State agency that is 

administering a program operated under 

a State plan under titles IV–B or IV–E 

of the Act. 

(d) Authorized purposes for requests 

and scope of information provided. The 

State PLS shall obtain location 

information under this section only for 

the purposes specified in paragraphs 

(d)(1) and (d)(2) of this section. 

(1) To locate an individual with 

respect to a child in a IV–D, non-IV–D, 

IV–B, or IV–E case. The State PLS shall 

locate individuals for the purpose of 

establishing parentage, or establishing, 

setting the amount of, modifying, or 

enforcing child support obligations or 

for determining who has or may have 

parental rights with respect to a child. 

For these purposes, only information 

available through the Federal PLS or the 

State PLS may be provided. This 

information is limited to Social Security 

Number(s), most recent address, 

employer name and address, employer 

identification number, wages or other 

income from, and benefits of, 

employment, including rights to, or 

enrollment in, health care coverage, and 

asset or debt information. 

(2) To locate an individual sought for 

the unlawful taking or restraint of a 

child or for child custody or visitation 

purposes. The State PLS shall locate 

individuals for the purpose of enforcing 

a State law with respect to the unlawful 

taking or restraint of a child or for 

making or enforcing a child custody or 

visitation determination as defined in 

section 463(d)(1) of the Act. For this 

purpose, only the information available 

through the Federal PLS or the State 

PLS may be provided. This information 

is limited to most recent address and 

place of employment of a parent or 

child. 

(e) Locate information subject to 

disclosure. Subject to the requirements 

of this section and the privacy 

safeguards required under section 

454(26) of the Act and the family 

violence indicators under section 

307.11(f)(1)(x) of this part, the State PLS 

shall disclose the following information 

to authorized persons for authorized 

purposes, 

(1) Federal PLS information described 

in sections 453 and 463 of the Act; and 

(2) Information from in-state locate 

sources. 

PART 303—STANDARDS FOR 

PROGRAM OPERATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 303 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 651 through 658, 660, 

663, 664, 666, 667, 1302, 1396a(a)(25), 

1396b(d)(2), 1396b(o), 1396b(p) and 1396(k). 

■ 2. Revise § 303.3 to read as follows: 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

56444 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 303.3 Location of noncustodial parents 

in IV–D cases. 

(a) Definition. For purposes of this 

section, location means obtaining 

information concerning the physical 

whereabouts of the noncustodial parent, 

or the noncustodial parent’s 

employer(s), other sources of income or 

assets, as appropriate, which is 

sufficient and necessary to take the next 

appropriate action in a IV–D case. 

(b) For all cases referred to the IV–D 

program for IV–D services because of an 

assignment of support rights or cases 

opened upon application for IV–D 

services under § 302.33 of this chapter, 

the IV–D program must attempt to locate 

all noncustodial parents or their sources 

of income and/or assets when location 

is needed to take a necessary action. 

Under this standard, the IV–D program 

must: 

(1) Use appropriate location sources 

such as the Federal PLS; interstate 

location networks; local officials and 

employees administering public 

assistance, general assistance, medical 

assistance, food stamps, and social 

services (whether such individuals are 

employed by the State or a political 

subdivision); relatives and friends of the 

noncustodial parent, current or past 

employers; the local telephone 

company; the U.S. Postal Service; 

financial references; unions; fraternal 

organizations; and police, parole, and 

probation records, if appropriate; and 

State agencies and departments, as 

authorized by State law, including those 

departments which maintain records of 

public assistance, wages and 

employment, unemployment insurance, 

income taxation, driver’s licenses, 

vehicle registration, and criminal 

records and other sources; 

(2) Establish working relationships 

with all appropriate agencies in order to 

use locate resources effectively; 

(3) Within no more than 75 calendar 

days of determining that location is 

necessary, access all appropriate 

location sources and ensure that 

location information is sufficient to take 

the next appropriate action in a case; 

(4) Refer appropriate IV–D cases to the 

IV–D program of any other State, in 

accordance with the requirements of 

§ 303.7 of this part. The IV–D program 

of such other State shall follow the 

procedures in paragraphs (b)(1) through 

(b)(3) of this section for such cases, as 

necessary, except that the responding 

State is not required to access the 

Federal PLS; 

(5) Repeat location attempts in cases 

in which previous attempts to locate 

noncustodial parents or sources of 

income and/or assets have failed, but 

adequate identifying and other 

information exists to meet requirements 

for submittal for location, either 

quarterly or immediately upon receipt 

of new information which may aid in 

location, whichever occurs sooner. 

Quarterly attempts may be limited to 

automated sources, but must include 

accessing State employment security 

files. Repeated attempts because of new 

information which may aid in location 

must meet the requirements of 

paragraph (b)(3) of this section; and 

(6) Have in effect safeguards, 

applicable to all confidential 

information handled by the IV–D 

program, that are designed to protect the 

privacy rights of the parties and that 

comply with the requirements of 

sections 454(26) and 454A(d) and (f) of 

the Act and §§ 303.21 and 307.13. 

(c) The State must establish 

guidelines defining diligent efforts to 

serve process. These guidelines must 

include periodically repeating service of 

process attempts in cases in which 

previous attempts to serve process have 

failed, but adequate identifying and 

other information exists to attempt 

service of process. 

■ 4. Section 303.20 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b)(7) as follows: 

§ 303.20 Minimum organizational and 

staffing requirements. 

(b) * * * 

(7) Operation of the State PLS as 

required under §§ 302.35, 303.3, and 

303.70 of this chapter. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Section 303.21 is added to read as 

follows: 

§ 303.21 Safeguarding and disclosure of 

confidential information. 

(a) Definitions—(1) Confidential 

information means any information 

relating to a specified individual or an 

individual who can be identified by 

reference to one or more factors specific 

to him or her, including but not limited 

to the individual’s Social Security 

number, residential and mailing 

addresses, employment information, 

and financial information. 

(2) Independent verification is the 

process of acquiring and confirming 

confidential information through the 

use of a second source. The information 

from the second source, which verifies 

the information about NDNH or FCR 

data, may be released to those 

authorized to inspect and use the 

information as authorized under the 

regulations or the Act. 

(b) Scope. The requirements of this 

section apply to the IV–D agency, any 

other State or local agency or official to 

whom the IV–D agency delegates any of 

the functions of the IV–D program, any 

official with whom a cooperative 

agreement as described in § 302.34 of 

this part has been entered into, and any 

person or private agency from whom the 

IV–D agency has purchased services 

pursuant to § 304.22 of this chapter. 

(c) General rule. Except as authorized 

by the Act and implementing 

regulations, an entity described in 

paragraph (b) of this section may not 

disclose any confidential information, 

obtained in connection with the 

performance of IV–D functions, outside 

the administration of the IV–D program. 

(d) Authorized disclosures. (1) Upon 

request, the IV–D agency may, to the 

extent that it does not interfere with the 

IV–D agency meeting its own 

obligations and subject to such 

requirements as the Office may 

prescribe, disclose confidential 

information to State agencies as 

necessary to carry out State agency 

functions under plans or programs 

under title IV (including tribal programs 

under title IV) and titles XIX, or XXI of 

the Act, including: 

(i) Any investigation, prosecution or 

criminal or civil proceeding conducted 

in connection with the administration of 

any such plan or program; and 

(ii) Information on known or 

suspected instances of physical or 

mental injury, sexual abuse or 

exploitation, or negligent treatment or 

maltreatment of a child under 

circumstances which indicate that the 

child’s health or welfare is threatened. 

(2) Upon request, the IV–D agency 

may disclose information in the SDNH, 

pursuant to sections 453A and 1137 of 

the Act for purposes of income and 

eligibility verification. 

(3) Authorized disclosures under 

paragraph (d)(1) and (2) of this section 

shall not include confidential 

information from the National Directory 

of New Hires or the Federal Case 

Registry, unless authorized under 

§ 307.13 of this Chapter or unless it is 

independently verified information. No 

financial institution data match 

information may be disclosed outside 

the administration of the IV–D program 

and no IRS information may be 

disclosed, unless independently verified 

or otherwise authorized in Federal 

statute. States must have safeguards in 

place as specified in section 454A(d) 

and (f) of the Act. 

(e) Safeguards. In addition to, and not 

in lieu of, the safeguards described in 

§ 307.13 of this chapter, which governs 

computerized support enforcement 

systems, the IV–D agency shall establish 

appropriate safeguards to comply with 

the provisions of this section. These 

safeguards shall also include 

prohibitions against the release of 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 56445 

information when the State has 

reasonable evidence of domestic 

violence or child abuse against a party 

or a child and that the disclosure of 

such information could be harmful to 

the party or the child, as required by 

section 454(26) of the Act, and shall 

include use of the family violence 

indicator required under 

§ 307.11(f)(1)(x) of this chapter. 

(f) Penalties for unauthorized 

disclosure. Any disclosure or use of 

confidential information in violation of 

the Act and implementing regulations 

shall be subject to any State and Federal 

statutes that impose legal sanctions for 

such disclosure. 

6. Revise § 303.70 to read as follows: 

§ 303.70 Procedures for submissions to 

the State Parent Locator Service (State PLS) 

or the Federal Parent Locator Service 

(Federal PLS). 

(a) The State agency will have 

procedures for submissions to the State 

PLS or the Federal PLS for the purpose 

of locating parents, putative fathers, or 

children for the purpose of establishing 

parentage or establishing, setting the 

amount of, modifying, or enforcing 

child support obligations; or for the 

purpose of enforcing any Federal or 

State law with respect to the unlawful 

taking or restraint of a child or making 

or enforcing a child custody or 

visitation determination as defined in 

section 463(d)(1) of the Act. 

(b) Only the central State PLS may 

make submittals to the Federal PLS for 

the purposes specified in paragraph (a) 

of this section. 

(c) All submittals shall be made in the 

manner and form prescribed by the 

Office. 

(d) All submittals shall contain the 

following information: 

(1) The parent’s or putative father’s 

name; 

(2) The parent’s or putative father’s 

Social Security Number (SSN). If the 

SSN is unknown, the IV–D program 

must make reasonable efforts to 

ascertain the individual’s SSN before 

making a submittal to the Federal PLS; 

and 

(3) Any other information prescribed 

by the Office. 

(e) The director of the IV–D agency or 

his or her designee shall attest annually 

to the following: 

(1)(i) The IV–D agency will only 

obtain information to facilitate the 

discovery of any individual in 

accordance with section 453(a)(2) of the 

Act for the purpose of establishing 

parentage, establishing, setting the 

amount of, modifying, or enforcing 

child support obligations, or for 

determining who has or may have 

parental rights with respect to a child, 

or in accordance with section 453(a)(3) 

of the Act for enforcing a State law with 

respect to the unlawful taking or 

restraint of a child, or for making or 

enforcing a child custody or visitation 

determination as defined in section 

463(d)(1) of the Act. 

(ii) The IV–D agency will only 

provide information to the authorized 

persons specified in sections 453(c) or 

463(d) of the Act and § 302.35 of this 

chapter. 

(2) In the case of a submittal made on 

behalf of a resident parent, legal 

guardian, attorney or agent of a child 

not receiving assistance under title IV– 

A, the IV–D agency must verify that the 

requesting individual has complied 

with the provisions of § 302.35 of this 

chapter. 

(3) The IV–D agency will treat any 

information obtained through the 

Federal PLS and SPLS as confidential 

and shall safeguard the information 

under the requirements of sections 

453(b), 453(l), 454(8), 454(26), and 

463(c) of the Act, § 303.21 of this part 

and instructions issued by the Office. 

(f)(1) The IV–D agency shall 

reimburse the Secretary for the fees 

required under: 

(i) Section 453(e)(2) of the Act 

whenever Federal PLS services are 

furnished to a resident parent, legal 

guardian, attorney or agent of a child 

not receiving assistance under title IV– 

A of the Act; 

(ii) Section 454(17) of the Act 

whenever Federal PLS services are 

furnished in parental kidnapping and 

child custody or visitation 

determination; 

(iii) Section 453(k)(3) of the Act 

whenever a State agency receives 

information from the Federal PLS 

pursuant to section 453 of the Act. 

(2)(i) The IV–D agency may charge an 

individual requesting information, or 

pay without charging the individual, the 

fees required under sections 453(e)(2), 

453(k)(3) or 454(17) of the Act except 

that the IV–D agency shall charge an 

individual specified in section 453(c)(3) 

of the Act the fee required under section 

453(e)(2) of the Act 

(ii) The IV–D agency may recover the 

fee required under section 453(e)(2) of 

the Act from the noncustodial parent 

who owes a support obligation to a 

family on whose behalf the IV–D agency 

is providing services and repay it to the 

individual requesting information or 

itself. 

(iii) State funds used to pay the fee 

under section 453(e)(2) of the Act are 

not program expenditures under the 

State plan but are program income 

under § 304.50 of this chapter. 

(3) The fees referenced in paragraph 

(f)(1) of this section shall be in an 

amount determined to be reasonable 

payment for the information exchange. 

(4)(i) If a State fails to transmit the 

fees charged by the Office under this 

section, the services provided by the 

Federal PLS in cases subject to the fees 

may be suspended until payment is 

received. 

(ii) Fees shall be transmitted in the 

amount and manner prescribed by the 

Office in instructions. 

PART 307—COMPUTERIZED 

SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS 

IN OPERATION AFTER OCTOBER 1, 

1997 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 307 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 652 through 658, 664, 

666 through 669A, and 1302. 

■ 2. Amend § 307.13 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 307.13 Security and confidentiality for 

computerized support enforcement 

systems in operation after October 1, 1997. 

* * * * * 

(a) Information integrity and security. 

Have safeguards protecting the integrity, 

accuracy, completeness of, access to, 

and use of data in the computerized 

support enforcement system. These 

safeguards shall include written policies 

concerning access to data by IV–D 

agency personnel, and the sharing of 

data with other persons to: 

(1) Permit access to and use of data to 

the extent necessary to carry out the 

State IV–D program under this chapter; 

(2) Specify the data which may be 

used for particular IV–D program 

purposes, and the personnel permitted 

access to such data; 

(3) Permit exchanging information 

with State and Tribal agencies 

administering programs under titles IV, 

XIX, and XXI of the Act, to the extent 

necessary to carry out those State and 

Tribal agency responsibilities under 

such programs in accordance with 

section 454A(f)(3) of the Act, and to the 

extent that it does not interfere with IV– 

D program meeting its own obligations. 

(4) Prohibit the disclosure of NDNH, 

FCR, financial institution, and IRS 

information outside the IV–D program 

except that: 

(i) IRS information is restricted as 

specified in the Internal Revenue Code; 

(ii) Independently verified 

information other than financial 

institution information may be released 

to authorized persons; 

(iii) NDNH and FCR information may 

be disclosed without independent 

verification to IV–B and IV–E agencies 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3

56446 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

for the purposes of establishing 

parentage or establishing parental rights 

with respect to a child; and 

(iv) NDNH and FCR information may 

be disclosed without independent 

verification to IV–A agencies for the 

purpose of assisting States to carry out 

their responsibilities of administering 

the Title IV–A programs. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E8–22054 Filed 9–25–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4184–01–P 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3