[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 191 (Thursday, October 2, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51601-51603]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26057]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Parole Commission

28 CFR Part 2


Paroling, Recommitting, and Supervising Federal Prisoners; 
Disclosure of Parole Commission Regional Office File

AGENCY: Parole Commission, Justice.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: U.S. Parole Commission is amending its regulations on 
disclosure of Parole Commission files to provide for expedited 
processing of requests and a multi-track system to comply with the 
``Electronic Freedom of Information Act Amendments of 1996.''

DATES: Effective October 1, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pamela A. Posch, Office of General 
Counsel, U.S. Parole Commission, 5550 Friendship Blvd., Chevy Chase, 
Maryland 20815, telephone (301) 492-5959.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 28, 1997, the Parole Commission 
published proposed rule changes in the Federal Register to implement a 
new law known as the ``Electronic Freedom of Information Act Amendments 
of 1996'' (E-FOIA). 62 FR 40316. These proposed rule changes provided 
for a multi-track system whereby requests for tape recordings, or for 
two documents or less, would be processed ahead of requests seeking 
numerous documents from the parole file. Further, the proposed rule 
provided for expedited processing of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 
requests if the requester demonstrates ``compelling need'' as defined 
in the regulation. Specifically, the Commission proposed adopting two 
categories in which compelling need could be demonstrated.

[[Page 51602]]

    The Parole Commission received public comment from one 
organization, the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press. The 
Reporters Committee recommended two changes to the Commission's 
proposed regulations. First, they urged that the Commission adopt a 
third category where compelling need could be demonstrated. That 
category was for cases involving ``a matter of widespread and 
exceptional media interest in which there exist possible questions 
about the government's integrity which affect public confidence.'' This 
third category was included in the Department of Justice's proposed 
regulations. Second, the Reporters Committee noted that the Parole 
Commission failed to include in its regulations provisions for 
improving the electronic availability of records. The Reporters 
Committee noted that it did not find in the Justice Department's 
proposals any indication that Justice Department rules would apply to 
the Commission, and similarly the Commission's proposals did not 
indicate that implementation of other sections of the E-FOIA would be 
covered by the Justice Department regulations.
    In response to the Reporters Committee request that the Commission 
adopt the language contained in the Department's proposed regulations 
for expedited treatment when government integrity is questioned, the 
Commission finds that this is unnecessary. The Department of Justice 
may wish to adopt such a specific category because of its prosecutorial 
functions in cases involving ``possible questions about the 
government's integrity'', but the Parole Commission considers that a 
media request that is driven by concern over ``possible questions'' of 
government integrity would already be covered by the second category 
which includes expedited processing for requesters demonstrating 
``urgency to inform the public concerning actual or alleged federal 
government activity.''
    In response to the Reporters Committee's request that the 
Commission include the electronic availability of records in its 
regulations, the Commission is adding a sentence so that it is clear to 
the public and to requesters that the Department of Justice's 
regulations apply to all FOIA-processing issues not covered by the 
Commission's own regulations and procedures. Although the Parole 
Commission is not promulgating its own regulation in regard to the 
public reading room, the Commission maintains a public reading room and 
records available in the public reading room will be available 
electronically to FOIA requesters.
    Also, the Department of Justice has revised its fee schedule in 
regard to FOIA requests and the Parole Commission is revising its 
regulations to comply with the fee revisions.
    Finally, the Parole Commission has removed references to ``Regional 
Office'' since the Commission no longer operates regional offices.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Statement

    The U.S. Parole Commission has determined that this proposed rule 
is not a significant rule within the meaning of Executive Order 12866, 
and the proposed rule has, accordingly, not been reviewed by the Office 
of Management and Budget. The proposed rule, if adopted, will not have 
a significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small 
entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 
605(b).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This rule will not result in the expenditure by States, local, and 
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of 
$100,000,000 or more in any one year, and it will not significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed 
necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

    This rule is not a major rule as defined by Sec. 804 of the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This rule will 
not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or more; 
a major increase in costs or prices; or significant adverse effects on 
competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on 
the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign-
based companies in domestic and export markets.

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 2

    Administrative practice and procedure, Probation and parole, 
Prisoners.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, the U.S. Parole Commission adopts the following 
amendment to 28 CFR part 2.

PART 2--PAROLE, RELEASE, SUPERVISION AND RECOMMITMENT OF PRISONERS, 
YOUTH OFFENDERS, AND JUVENILE DELINQUENTS

    1. The authority citation for 28 CFR Part 2 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 18 U.S.C. 4203(a)(1) and 4204(a)(6).

    2. Section 2.56 is amended by removing the words ``regional 
office'' from the title of the section; and by amending paragraph (a) 
by removing ``prisoner's regional office file'' and replacing with 
``subject's Parole Commission file''.
    3. Section 2.56 is further amended by adding a new paragraph 
(b)(1); by adding and reserving paragraph (b)(2); by amending paragraph 
(f) to replace ``$8.00'' with ``$14.00''; by adding a new sentence to 
the end of paragraph (g); and by adding a new paragraph (i). These 
amendments read as follows:


Sec. 2.56  Disclosure of Parole Commission file.

* * * * *
    (b) Scope of disclosure. * * *
    (1) Requests that are only for a copy of the tape recording of a 
hearing will be processed ahead of requests seeking multiple documents 
from the Parole Commission file (priority processing). A requester may 
limit the scope of the request to a tape recording only (or to a tape 
recording and/or up to two documents) and thereby qualify for priority 
processing. For example, a request for the tape recording and the 
examiner's summary of a hearing qualifies for priority processing.
    (2) [Reserved]
* * * * *
    (g) Relation to other provisions. * * * Provisions of the Freedom 
of Information Act not specifically addressed by these regulations 
(including the reading room) are covered by 28 CFR, part 16, subpart A.
* * * * *
    (i) Expedited processing of Requests. (1) The Commission will 
provide expedited processing of a request when a requester has 
demonstrated a compelling need as defined in this section and has 
presented a statement certified by such person to be true and correct 
to the best of such person's knowledge and belief. A requester may 
demonstrate ``compelling need'' by establishing one of the following:
    (i) That failure to obtain the requested records on an expedited 
basis could reasonably be expected to pose an imminent threat to the 
life or physical safety of an individual; or
    (ii) With respect to a request made by a person primarily engaged 
in

[[Page 51603]]

disseminating information, urgency to inform the public concerning 
actual or alleged federal government activity.
    (2) A determination as to whether to provide expedited processing 
shall be made within ten days after the date of the request. However, 
the fact of lawful imprisonment in a correctional facility or 
revocation of parole shall not be deemed to pose an imminent threat to 
the life or physical safety of an individual. The Commission shall 
process as soon as practicable any request for records to which it has 
granted expedited processing. An administrative appeal of a denial of 
expedited processing may be made to the Chairman of the Commission 
within thirty days from the date of notice denying expedited 
processing.

    Dated: September 24, 1997.
Michael J. Gaines,
Chairman, U.S. Parole Commission.
[FR Doc. 97-26057 Filed 10-1-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-P