C.F.R. » Title 28 » CHAPTER I—DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE › PART 16—PRODUCTION OR DISCLOSURE OF MATERIAL OR INFORMATION › Subpart D—Access to and Amendment of Individual Records Pursuant to the Privacy Act of 1974, and Other Privacy Protections

28 C.F.R. § 16.51

Security of systems of records

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Each component shall establish and maintain administrative, technical, and physical controls consistent with applicable Department and Government-wide laws, regulations, policies, and standards, to ensure the security and confidentiality of records, and to protect against reasonably anticipated threats or hazards to their security or integrity, including against any reasonably anticipated unauthorized access, use, or disclosure, which could result in substantial harm, embarrassment, inconvenience, or unfairness to individuals about whom information is maintained. The stringency of these controls shall correspond to the sensitivity of the records that the controls protect. At a minimum, each component shall maintain administrative, technical, or physical controls to ensure that:

(1) Records are protected from unauthorized access, including unauthorized public access;

(2) The physical area in which records are maintained is supervised or appropriately secured to prevent unauthorized persons from having access to them;

(3) Records are protected from damage, loss, or unauthorized alteration or destruction; and

(4) Records are not disclosed to unauthorized persons or to authorized persons for unauthorized purposes in either oral or written form.

(b) Each component shall establish procedures that restrict access to records to only those individuals within the Department who must have access to those records in order to perform their duties and that prevent inadvertent disclosure of records.

(c) The CPCLO, or a designee of the CPCLO, may impose additional administrative, technical, or physical controls to protect records in consultation with the Chief Information Officer and the Director of the Office of Records Management Policy.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1996–2012 · leading case: Dennis Deters v. United States Parole Comm'n, 85 F.3d 655 (D.C. Cir. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dennis Deters v. United States Parole Comm'n, 85 F.3d 655 (D.C. Cir. 1996). “1992), and a rule providing that a PSI is not subject to correction or amendment, 28 C.F.R. § 16.51 (c). The Commission, however, has not exempted the system from subsection (e)(5).”
White v. United States Prob. Off., 148 F.3d 1124 (D.C. Cir. 1998). “The Act also gives an individual the right to request amendment of his records. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(d). Under regulations, however, presentence reports and BOP inmate records systems are exempt from the amendment provisions of the Act.”
Williams v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons & Parole Comm'n, 85 F. App'x 299 (3rd Cir. 2004). “1998) (citing 28 C.F.R. §§ 16.51 (c), 16.97(a)). Consequently, Williams has no ex-pungement claim under the Privacy Act.”
Morris v. United States Prob. Servs., 723 F. Supp. 2d 225 (D.D.C. 2010). “1998) (citing 28 C.F.R. §§ 16.51 (c), 16.97(a); Deters v.”
United States v. Ballard, 855 F. Supp. 2d 406 (E.D. Pa. 2012). “1998) and 28 C.F.R. §§ 16.51 (c), 16.97(a)); see also Griffin v.”
Morris v. United States Prob. Servs. (D.D.C. 2010). “1998) (citing 28 C.F.R. §§ 16.51 (c), 16.97(a); Deters v.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.