(a) The following system of records is exempt from 5 U.S.C. § 552a(d):

Ask a legal question, get an answer ASAP!
Click here to chat with a lawyer about your rights.

Terms Used In 28 CFR 16.83

  • Amendment: A proposal to alter the text of a pending bill or other measure by striking out some of it, by inserting new language, or both. Before an amendment becomes part of the measure, thelegislature must agree to it.
  • Evidence: Information presented in testimony or in documents that is used to persuade the fact finder (judge or jury) to decide the case for one side or the other.
  • Testimony: Evidence presented orally by witnesses during trials or before grand juries.

(1) The Executive Office for Immigration Review’s Records and Management Information System (JUSTICE/EOIR-001).

This exemption applies only to the extent that information in the system is subject to exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552a(k) (1) and (2).

(b) Exemption from the particular subsections are justified for the following reasons:

(1) From subsection (d) because access to information which has been properly classified pursuant to an Executive Order could have an adverse effect on the national security. In addition, from subsection (d) because unauthorized access to certain investigatory material could compromise ongoing or potential investigations; reveal the identity of confidential informants; or constitute unwarranted invasions of the personal privacy of third parties.

(2) From subsection (d) (2), (3), and (4) because the record of proceeding constitutes an official record which includes transcripts of quasi-judicial administrative proceedings, investigatory materials, evidentiary materials such as exhibits, decisional memoranda, and other case-related papers. Administrative due process could not be achieved by the ex parte “correction” of such materials by the individual who is the subject thereof.

(c) The following system of records is exempted form 5 U.S.C. § 552a(d).

(1) Practitioner Compliant/Disciplinary Files (JUSTICE/EOIR 003). This exemption applies only to the extent that information in this system is subject to exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552a(j)(2), (k)(1), and (k)(2). To the extent that information in a record pertaining to an individual does not relate to national defense or foreign policy, official Federal investigations and/or law enforcement matters, the exemption does not apply. In addition, where compliance would not appear to interfere with or adversely affect the overall law or regulatory enforcement process, the applicable exemption may be waived by the Executive Office for Immigration Review.

(d) Exemption from subsection (d) is justified for the following reasons:

(1) From the access and amendment provisions of subsection (d) because access to the records contained in this system of records could inform the subject of the investigation of an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation or the existence of that investigation; of the nature and scope of the information and evidence obtained as to the subject’s activities; of the identity of confidential sources, witnesses, and law enforcement personnel; and of information that may enable the subject to avoid detection or apprehension. These factors would present a serious impediment to effective law and regulatory enforcement where they prevent the successful completion of the investigation, endanger the physical safety of confidential sources, witnesses, and law enforcement personnel, and/or lead to the improper influencing of witnesses, the destruction of evidence, or the fabrication of testimony. In addition, granting access to such information could disclose security-sensitive or confidential business information or information that would constitute an unwarranted invasion of the personal privacy of third parties. Finally, access to the records could result in the release of properly classified information which would compromise the national defense or disrupt foreign policy. Amendment of the records would interfere with ongoing investigations and law enforcement activities and impose an enormous administrative burden by requiring investigations to be continuously reinvestigated.

(e) The following system of records is exempt from 5 U.S.C. § 552a(d): Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO) Case Management System (CMS) (JUSTICE/EOIR-002). This exemption applies only to the extent that information in the system is subject to exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552a(k)(1) and (2).

(f) Exemption from 5 U.S.C. § 552a(d) is justified for the system of records in paragraph (e) of this section for the following reasons:

(1) In limited circumstances, from subsection (d) when access to the records contained in the system of records in paragraph (e) of this section could inform the subject of an ongoing investigation of an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation or the existence of that investigation; of the nature and scope of the information and evidence obtained as to the subject’s activities; of the identity of confidential sources, witnesses, and law enforcement personnel; and of information that may enable the subject to avoid detection or apprehension. These factors would present a serious impediment to effective law and regulatory enforcement where they prevent the successful completion of the investigation, endanger the physical safety of confidential sources, witnesses, and law enforcement personnel; and/or lead to the improper influencing of witnesses, the destruction of evidence, or the fabrication of testimony. In addition, granting access to such information could disclose security-sensitive or confidential business information or information that would constitute an unwarranted invasion of the personal privacy of third parties.

(2) From subsections (d)(2), (3), and (4) because the administrative case files constitute an official record which includes transcripts of administrative proceedings, investigatory materials, evidentiary materials such as exhibits, decisional memoranda, and other case-related papers. Administrative due process could not be achieved by the ex parte “correction” of such materials by the individual who is the subject thereof.

[Order No. 18-86, 51 FR 32305, Sept. 11, 1986, as amended by Order No. 180-99, 64 FR 61787, Nov. 15, 1999; Order No. 11-2019; 84 FR 64200, Nov. 21, 2019]