[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 183 (Thursday, September 22, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57825-57830]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-20433]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

32 CFR Part 97

[Docket ID: DOD-2018-OS-0103]
RIN 0790-AK11


Release of Official Information in Litigation and Presentation of 
Witness Testimony by DoD Personnel (Touhy Regulation)

AGENCY: Office of the General Counsel of the Department of Defense 
(DoD), DoD.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: DoD is finalizing the requirements for submitting subpoenas 
and litigation requests to the Department as well as the procedures 
that its personnel will follow to respond. These amendments consolidate 
component-level requirements and procedures into a single, updated 
Department-level Touhy rule.

DATES: This final rule is effective on October 24, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Denise Shellman, 703-571-0793, 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background and Legal Basis for This Rule

    The Housekeeping Statute, 5 U.S.C. 301, authorizes agency heads to 
promulgate regulations governing ``the custody, use, and preservation 
of its records, papers, and property.''
    The Supreme Court held in United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 
U.S. 462 (1951), that under such authority, agency heads may establish 
procedures for determining whether to release official information and 
allow personnel testimony sought through a subpoena or other litigation 
request. This regulation sets forth DoD's procedures, which as the 
Supreme Court explained, are useful and necessary as a matter of 
internal administration to prevent possible harm from unrestricted 
disclosures in court.
    In DoD Directive 5145.01, ``General Counsel of the Department of 
Defense (GC DoD),'' December 2, 2013, as amended (available at https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodd/514501p.pdf), 
and pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 113, the Secretary of Defense has delegated 
the authority to establish those procedures to the General Counsel.
    This rule's corresponding internal issuance is DoD Directive 
5405.2, ``Release of Official Information in

[[Page 57826]]

Litigation and Testimony by DoD Personnel as Witnesses,'' July 23, 1985 
(available at https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodd/540502p.pdf). When this rule is finalized, DoD Directive 
5405.2 will be reissued as DoD Instruction 5405.02, ``Release of 
Official Information in Litigation and Presentation of Witness 
Testimony by DoD Personnel,'' which will be made available at https://www.esd.whs.mil/Directives/issuances/dodi/.

B. Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register (86 FR 
26444-26448) on May 14, 2021, with no public comments received. The 
rule proposed modifications primarily to clarify and streamline the 
requirements for the proper submission of subpoenas and litigation 
requests, the factors that chief legal advisors will consider when 
responding, and the fees that may be collected to cover associated 
expenses.
    The modifications included:
     Adding in Sec.  97.1 references to 5 U.S.C. 301 and the 
Supreme Court's decision in United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 
U.S. 462 (1951), to note the legal basis for this rule's purpose.
     Reorganizing the paragraphs in Sec.  97.2 to provide a 
more practical order of categories covered by and excluded from the 
rule.
     Revising in Sec.  97.3 the definition of ``personnel'' to 
make clear that the rule covers not only Service members and civilian 
employees of every DoD component, but also employees of other Federal 
agencies who are assigned to, detailed to, or otherwise affiliated with 
a DoD component.
     Adding in Sec.  97.3 the defined term ``chief legal 
advisors'' to replace the phrases ``appropriate DoD official designated 
in paragraph (a) of this section'' and ``appropriate DoD official 
designated in Sec.  97.6(a),'' which are used awkwardly throughout the 
current rule to refer to a component's chief attorney. Also adding in 
Sec.  97.3 the defined term ``court'' to replace the awkward phrase 
``court of competent jurisdiction or other appropriate authority'' 
throughout the rule. These changes allow for cleaner sentences and 
result in a more straightforward rule that is easier to follow.
     Moving the definition of ``disclosure'' from Sec.  97.6 to 
Sec.  97.3, the Definitions section, so that the reader may find it 
easily. For the same reason, separating the defined terms 
``litigation'' and ``litigation request,'' which appear together in the 
current rule under the definition of ``litigation.''
     Dividing the Responsibilities section into two separate 
sections (GC DoD and DoD Component heads); dividing the Procedures 
section into five separate sections (authorities, factors to consider, 
requirements and determinations, fees, and expert or opinion 
testimony); and subdividing the five new Procedures sections to list 
separately each item that requesting parties, personnel, and chief 
legal advisors must take into account. These formatting changes result 
in a more streamlined rule that is easier to use.
    While no public comments were received, DoD is making two 
administrative revisions in this final rule:
     Adding in Sec.  97.8 a factor to consider whether a 
disclosure would reveal information protected by the Privacy Act.
     Adding a third appendix for litigation requests and 
demands to the Department of the Army.
    The general notice-and-comment requirement of the Administrative 
Procedure Act does not apply to these administrative revisions. DoD 
finds for good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) that another round of 
notice and comment is impracticable and unnecessary. Adding Privacy Act 
information to the factors to consider simply recognizes an existing 
obligation set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552a. The revision also will reinforce 
DoD components' compliance with this statute. And similar to the 
previously published appendices for the Departments of the Navy and Air 
Force, the Department of the Army appendix simply lists the appropriate 
offices where parties should submit their requests and demands.

C. Expected Impact of the Final Rule

    As no public comment was received on this analysis, the Department 
is finalizing this section without change. Consolidating Touhy 
requirements into a single rule, along with updating the rule to make 
it clearer and more streamlined, will produce efficiencies and 
uniformity to the public's benefit. Less attorney time will be spent 
searching for only one rule and complying with its requirements. The 
Department has concluded that attorneys for third-party litigants will 
save an estimated 30 minutes of research, review, and compliance time 
per subpoena or litigation request when referring to the CFR for 
guidance.
    For purposes of estimating the cost savings, the Department's 
subject matter experts deemed it reasonable to use the mean hourly wage 
for lawyers as informed by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, 
$69.86.\1\ Subject matter experts further advised that at least 80% of 
subpoenas and litigation requests submitted to DoD involve consultation 
of the various rules in the CFR.\2\ An average of 1,405 requests are 
received annually across the entire Department, according to Fiscal 
Year 2016 data. This rule should result in an annual cost savings of 
approximately $39,261.32, which is the impacted percentage (80%) of 
total annual requests (1,405) multiplied by the attorney hours saved 
per request (0.5) and the mean hourly wage ($69.86)--in other words, 
0.8*1,405*0.5*69.86 = $39,261.32. These savings are reflected in the 
chart below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This information can be found in the website of the Bureau 
of Labor Statistics under National Wage Data for Lawyers, Occupation 
Code 23-1011 (available at https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes231011.htm), last updated in May 2019.
    \2\ The Department consulted with subject matter experts in the 
DoD Office of the General Counsel and offices of chief legal 
counsels of various components, who provided the estimates of 
impacted percentage of total requests and of the attorney hours 
saved per request.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Litigation         Impacted                                            Projected cost
                 Rules                         Components         requests in         requests        Hours saved         Lawyers'          savings to
                                                                      2016              (%)           per request       hourly wage           public
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
93....................................  NSA.....................           35   x            80   x           0.5   x        $69.86   =          $978.04
97....................................  DoD.....................           20   x            80   x           0.5   x         69.86   =           558.88
267...................................  NRO.....................           10   x            80   x           0.5   x         69.86   =           279.44
516G..................................  Army....................          400   x            80   x           0.5   x         69.86   =        11,177.60
720, 725..............................  Navy....................          940   x            80   x           0.5   x         69.86   =        26,267.36
                                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.............................  ........................  ...........  ...  ...........  ...  ...........  ...  ...........   =        39,261.32
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 57827]]

    In addition to these cost savings, there will be an unquantified 
benefit of transparency through access to official information, while 
safeguarding classified, privileged, and personally identifiable 
information.

REGULATORY COMPLIANCE ANALYSIS

A. Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' and 
Executive Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review''

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all 
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if 
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize 
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public 
health and safety effects, distribute impacts, and equity). Executive 
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and 
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting 
flexibility. Following the requirements of these Executive orders, the 
Office of Management and Budget has determined that this final rule is 
not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive 
Order 12866. DoD estimates that the rule would generate $9,309.05 in 
annualized cost savings at the 7% discount rate, discounted to a 2016 
equivalent, over a perpetual time as discussed in the Expected Impact 
of the Final Rule section. The present value savings are estimated at 
$51,463.58.

B. Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.)

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, this rule has not been 
designated a major rule, as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C. Public Law 96-354, ``Regulatory Flexibility Act'' (5 U.S.C. 601)

    The DoD Office of General Counsel certified that this final rule is 
not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, because it 
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. Accordingly, DoD is not required to prepare a 
regulatory flexibility analysis.

D. Section 202 of Public Law 104-4, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act'' (2 
U.S.C. 1532)

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 
1532, requires agencies to assess anticipated costs and benefits before 
issuing any rule whose mandates require the expenditure of $100 million 
or more (in 1995 dollars, adjusted annually for inflation) in any one 
year. This final rule will not mandate any requirements for State, 
local, or tribal governments, nor will it affect private sector costs.

E. Public Law 96-511, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' (44 U.S.C. Chapter 
35)

    It has been determined that 32 CFR part 97 does not impose 
reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction 
Act.

F. Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism''

    Executive Order 13132 establishes certain requirements that an 
agency must meet when it promulgates a proposed rule (and subsequent 
final rule) that imposes substantial direct requirement costs on State 
and local governments, preempts State law, or otherwise has federalism 
implications. This final rule will not have a substantial effect on 
State and local governments.

G. Executive Order 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments''

    Executive Order 13175 establishes certain requirements that an 
agency must meet when it promulgates a proposed rule (and subsequent 
final rule) that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on one or 
more Indian tribes, preempts tribal law, or affects the distribution of 
power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian 
tribes. This final rule will not have a substantial effect on Indian 
tribal governments.

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 97

    Archives and records, Courts, Information.


0
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 97 is revised to read as follows:

PART 97--RELEASE OF OFFICIAL INFORMATION IN LITIGATION AND 
PRESENTATION OF WITNESS TESTIMONY BY DOD PERSONNEL (TOUHY 
REGULATION)

Sec.
97.1 Purpose.
97.2 Applicability.
97.3 Definitions.
97.4 Policy.
97.5 Responsibilities--GC DoD.
97.6 Responsibilities--DoD Component heads.
97.7 Procedures--authorities.
97.8 Procedures--factors to consider.
97.9 Procedures--requirements and determinations.
97.10 Procedures--fees.
97.11 Procedures--expert or opinion testimony.
Appendix A to Part 97--Litigation Requests and Demands to the 
Department of the Army
Appendix B to Part 97--Litigation Requests and Demands to the 
Department of the Navy
Appendix C to Part 97--Litigation Requests and Demands to the 
Department of the Air Force

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 10 U.S.C. 113.


Sec.  97.1  Purpose.

    This part establishes policy, assigns responsibilities, and 
prescribes procedures for the release of official information in 
litigation and the presentation of witness testimony by Department of 
Defense (DoD) personnel pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 301 and the Supreme 
Court's decision in United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 U.S. 462 
(1951).


Sec.  97.2  Applicability.

    This part:
    (a) Applies to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Military 
Departments, the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 
and the Joint Staff, the Combatant Commands, the Office of the 
Inspector General of the Department of Defense, the Defense Agencies, 
the DoD Field Activities, and all other organizational entities within 
the DoD (referred to collectively in this part as the ``DoD 
Components'').
    (b) Is intended only to provide guidance for the internal 
operations of the DoD, without displacing the responsibility of the 
Department of Justice to represent the United States in litigation.
    (c) Does not preclude official comments on matters in litigation.
    (d) Does not apply to the release of official information or the 
presentation of witness testimony in connection with:
    (1) Courts-martial convened by the authority of a Military 
Department.
    (2) Administrative proceedings or investigations conducted by or 
for a DoD Component.
    (3) Security-clearance adjudicative proceedings, including those 
conducted pursuant to DoD Directive 5220.6, ``Defense Industrial 
Personnel Security Clearance Review Program,'' January 2, 1992, as 
amended (available at https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodd/522006p.pdf).
    (4) Administrative proceedings conducted by or for the Equal 
Employment Opportunity Commission or the Merit Systems Protection 
Board.
    (5) Negotiated grievance proceedings conducted in accordance with a 
collective bargaining agreement.

[[Page 57828]]

    (6) Requests by Government counsel representing the United States 
or a Federal agency in litigation.
    (7) Disclosures to Federal, State, local, or foreign authorities 
related to investigations or other law-enforcement activities conducted 
by a DoD law-enforcement officer, agent, or organization.
    (e) Does not affect in any way existing laws or DoD programs 
governing:
    (1) The release of official information or the presentation of 
witness testimony in grand jury proceedings.
    (2) Freedom of Information Act requests submitted pursuant to 32 
CFR part 286, even if the records sought are related to litigation.
    (3) Privacy Act requests submitted pursuant to 32 CFR part 310, 
even if the records sought are related to litigation.
    (4) The release of official information outside of litigation.
    (f) Does not create any right or benefit (substantive or 
procedural) enforceable at law against the DoD or the United States.


Sec.  97.3  Definitions.

    These terms and their definitions are for the purpose of this part.
    Chief legal advisors. (1) The General Counsel of the Department of 
Defense (GC DoD).
    (2) The General Counsel of a Military Department.
    (3) The Legal Counsel to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
    (4) The Judge Advocate General of a Military Service.
    (5) The Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant of the Marine Corps.
    (6) The Staff Judge Advocate to a Combatant Commander.
    (7) The General Counsel to the Inspector General of the Department 
of Defense.
    (8) The General Counsel of a Defense Agency.
    (9) The General Counsel of a DoD Field Activity.
    (10) The chief legal advisor of any other organizational entity 
within the DoD.
    Court. A Federal, State, or local court, tribunal, commission, 
board, or other adjudicative body of competent jurisdiction.
    Demand. An order or subpoena by a court of competent jurisdiction 
for the production or release of official information or for the 
presentation of witness testimony by DoD personnel at deposition or 
trial.
    Disclosure. The release of official information in litigation or 
the presentation of witness testimony by DoD personnel.
    Litigation. All pretrial (e.g., discovery), trial, and post-trial 
stages of existing judicial or administrative actions, hearings, 
investigations, or similar proceedings before a civilian court, whether 
foreign or domestic.
    Litigation request. Any written request by a party in litigation or 
the party's attorney for the production or release of official 
information or for the presentation of witness testimony by DoD 
personnel at deposition, trial, or similar proceeding.
    Official information. All information of any kind and however 
stored that is in the custody and control of the DoD, relates to 
information in the custody and control of the DoD, or was acquired by 
DoD personnel due to their official duties or status.
    Personnel. (1) Present and former (e.g., retired, separated) 
Service members, including Service academy cadets and midshipmen.
    (2) Present and former (e.g., retired, separated) civilian 
employees of a DoD Component, including non-appropriated fund activity 
employees.
    (3) Present and former (e.g., retired, separated) employees of 
another Federal agency assigned to, detailed to, or otherwise 
affiliated with a DoD Component.
    (4) Non-U.S. nationals who perform or have performed services 
overseas for any of the Military Services in accordance with a status 
of forces agreement.
    (5) Any individuals who perform or have performed services for a 
DoD Component through a contractual arrangement.


Sec.  97.4  Policy.

    The DoD generally should make official information reasonably 
available for use in Federal, State, and foreign courts and other 
adjudicative bodies if the information is not classified, privileged, 
or otherwise protected from public disclosure.


Sec.  97.5  Responsibilities--GC DoD.

    The GC DoD has overall responsibility for the policy in this part, 
oversees the implementation of its procedures throughout the DoD, and 
provides supplemental guidance as appropriate.


Sec.  97.6  Responsibilities--DoD Component heads.

    The DoD Component heads:
    (a) Implement the policy and procedures in this part and, through 
their chief legal advisors, provide guidance for their respective 
components.
    (b) Must issue or update, as appropriate, their respective 
components' implementing regulations within 180 days of October 24, 
2022.


Sec.  97.7  Procedures--authorities.

    (a) In response to a litigation request or demand, and after any 
required coordination with the Department of Justice, the chief legal 
advisors (see Sec.  97.3) are authorized to:
    (1) Determine whether their respective DoD Components may release 
official information originated by or in the custody of such 
components.
    (2) Determine whether personnel assigned to, detailed to, or 
affiliated with their respective DoD Components may be contacted, 
interviewed, or used as witnesses concerning official information or, 
in exceptional circumstances, as expert witnesses.
    (3) Impose conditions or limitations on disclosures approved 
pursuant to this paragraph (a) (e.g., approve the release of official 
information only to a Federal judge for in camera review).
    (4) Assert claims of privilege or protection before any court or 
adjudicative body.
    (b) The GC DoD may assume primary responsibility for responding to 
any litigation request or demand.


Sec.  97.8  Procedures--factors to consider.

    In making a determination pursuant to Sec.  97.7(a), the chief 
legal advisors will consider whether:
    (a) The litigation request or demand is overbroad, unduly 
burdensome, or otherwise inappropriate under applicable law or court 
rules.
    (b) The disclosure would be improper (e.g., the information is 
irrelevant, cumulative, or disproportional to the needs of the case) 
under the rules of procedure governing the litigation from which the 
request or demand arose.
    (c) The official information or witness testimony is privileged or 
otherwise protected from disclosure under applicable law.
    (d) The disclosure would violate a statute, Executive order, 
regulation, or policy.
    (e) The disclosure would reveal:
    (1) Information properly classified pursuant to Volume 1 of DoD 
Manual 5200.01, ``DoD Information Security Program: Overview, 
Classification, and Declassification,'' February 24, 2012, as amended 
(available at https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodm/520001m_vol1.pdf?ver=2018-05-04-091448-843).
    (2) Controlled Unclassified Information pursuant to Volume 4 of DoD 
Manual 5200.01, ``DoD Information Security Program: Controlled 
Unclassified Information (CUI),'' February 24, 2012, as amended 
(available at https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/
issuances/

[[Page 57829]]

dodm/520001-V4p.PDF?ver=2018-05-09-115318-927).
    (3) Technical data withheld pursuant to 32 CFR part 250.
    (4) Information protected by the Privacy Act, which may not be 
disclosed in the absence of written consent, a routine use, or other 
authority listed in 5 U.S.C. 552a(b).
    (5) Information otherwise exempt from unrestricted disclosure.
    (f) The disclosure would:
    (1) Interfere with an ongoing enforcement proceeding.
    (2) Compromise a constitutional right.
    (3) Expose an intelligence source or confidential informant.
    (4) Divulge a trade secret or similar confidential information.
    (5) Be otherwise inappropriate.


Sec.  97.9  Procedures--requirements and determinations.

    (a) A litigation request or demand must describe, in writing and 
with specificity, the nature of the official information or witness 
testimony sought, its relevance to the litigation, and other pertinent 
details addressing the factors in Sec.  97.8.
    (b) Personnel who receive a litigation request or demand must 
notify their DoD Component's chief legal advisor immediately. Former 
personnel (e.g., retired Service members, separated employees, past 
contractors) must notify the chief legal advisor of the component to 
which they were last assigned.
    (c) If another DoD Component or Federal agency originated the 
responsive information or otherwise has the primary equity with respect 
to that information, the chief legal advisor will:
    (1) Transfer the litigation request or demand (or the appropriate 
portions) to such other component or agency for action.
    (2) Inform the requesting party or issuing court.
    (3) In case of conflict, elevate to the GC DoD for resolution.
    (d) If the litigation request or demand requires a response before 
a determination can be made, the chief legal advisor will inform the 
requesting party or the issuing court that the request or demand is 
still under consideration. The chief legal advisor also may seek a stay 
from the court in question until a final determination is made.
    (e) Upon making a final determination pursuant to Sec.  97.7(a), 
the chief legal advisor will inform the requesting party or issuing 
court.
    (f) If the chief legal advisor approves the release of official 
information or the presentation of witness testimony, personnel will 
limit the disclosure to those matters specified in the litigation 
request or demand, subject to any conditions imposed by the chief legal 
advisor. Personnel may not release, produce, comment on, or testify 
about any official information without the chief legal advisor's prior 
written approval.
    (g) If a court orders a disclosure that the chief legal advisor 
previously disapproved or has yet to approve, personnel must 
respectfully decline to comply with the court's order unless the chief 
legal advisor directs otherwise.


Sec.  97.10  Procedures--fees.

    Parties seeking official information by litigation request or 
demand may be charged reasonable fees in accordance with Volume 11A, 
Chapter 4 of DoD 7000.14-R, ``Department of Defense Financial 
Management Regulation: Reimbursable Operations Policy: User Fees,'' 
July 2016 (available at http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/fmr/current/11a/11a_04.pdf), to reimburse expenses associated 
with the Government's response. These reimbursable expenses may include 
the cost of:
    (a) Materials and equipment used to search for, copy, and produce 
responsive information.
    (b) Personnel time spent processing and responding to the request 
or demand.
    (c) Attorney time spent assisting with the Government's response, 
to include reviewing the request or demand and the potentially 
responsive information.


Sec.  97.11  Procedures--expert or opinion testimony.

    (a) Personnel may not present expert or opinion testimony involving 
official information, except when:
    (1) The testimony is presented on behalf of the United States, a 
Federal agency, or any party represented by the Department of Justice.
    (2) The chief legal advisor of the DoD Component with primary 
equity has granted special written approval upon a showing of 
exceptional need or unique circumstances, but only if the anticipated 
testimony is not adverse to the interests of the DoD or the United 
States and is presented at no expense to the Government.
    (b) If a court orders the presentation of testimony disallowed by 
paragraph (a) of this section, personnel must respectfully decline to 
comply with the court's order unless the chief legal advisor directs 
otherwise.

Appendix A to Part 97--Litigation Requests and Demands to the 
Department of the Army

    A litigation request or demand to the Department of the Army 
(DA) must be submitted at least 14 days before the desired date to 
the appropriate disclosure authority:
    (a) Staff Judge Advocates (SJAs), chief counsel, and legal 
advisors are the disclosure authorities for requests and demands 
involving unclassified information within the custody, control, or 
knowledge of their respective organizations when the United States 
has no interest in the litigation. Requests and demands will be 
processed by local legal offices (in consultation with Litigation 
Division as needed) subject to the limitations in this appendix.
    (b) The General Litigation Branch, Litigation Division, U.S. 
Army Legal Services Agency (USALSA), 9275 Gunston Road, Fort 
Belvoir, VA 22060, is the disclosure authority or may delegate 
disclosure authority for requests and demands involving:
    (1) Terrorism, espionage, nuclear weapons, or intelligence 
sources and methods.
    (2) Classified information.
    (3) Privileged information.
    (4) Technical data pursuant to 32 CFR part 250.
    (5) Safety records and information produced by commands, 
installation safety offices, or the U.S. Army Combat Readiness 
Command and Safety Center (USACRC).
    (6) Expert testimony.
    (7) All other matters not listed in this appendix.
    (c) Army Medical Center and Command Judge Advocates and 
supporting SJAs (in consultation with the Defense Health Agency as 
needed) are the disclosure authorities for requests and demands 
involving medical records or other information within the custody, 
control, or knowledge of their respective permanent station 
hospitals. For requests and demands involving factual testimony by 
medical providers, Commanders (in consultation with their legal 
advisors) are the disclosure authorities for their respective 
Medical Commands when the United States has no interest in the 
litigation.
    (d) The Contract Litigation & Intellectual Property Division, 
USALSA, 9275 Gunston Road, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060, is the disclosure 
authority for requests and demands involving:
    (1) Patents, copyrights, trade secrets, or trademarks.
    (2) Taxation matters.
    (3) Bid protests or contract appeals before the Armed Services 
Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) or the Government Accountability 
Office, except that contracting officers (in coordination with their 
servicing SJAs and the Division-assigned trial attorney) may release 
official information for use in litigation before the ASBCA, 
pursuant to 48 CFR part 5, subpart 5.4 (the Federal Acquisition 
Regulation (FAR)).
    (e) The Procurement Fraud Division, USALSA, 9275 Gunston Road, 
Fort Belvoir, VA 22060, is the disclosure authority for requests and 
demands involving procurement fraud matters, including qui tam 
actions.

[[Page 57830]]

    (f) The Environmental Law Division, USALSA, 9275 Gunston Road, 
Fort Belvoir, VA 22060, is the disclosure authority for requests and 
demands involving:
    (1) Energy, communication, transportation, or utility service 
proceedings.
    (2) Environmental or natural resources matters, to include water 
rights and affirmative environmental cost recovery.
    (g) The Tort Litigation Branch, Litigation Division, USALSA, 
9275 Gunston Road, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060, is the disclosure 
authority for requests and demands involving medical care cost 
recovery or property claims brought by the United States.
    (h) The Office of the Chief Counsel, U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers (USACE), 441 G Street NW, Washington, DC, 20314-1000, is 
the disclosure authority for requests and demands involving USACE 
navigation, civil works, Clean Water Act 404 permit authority, 
environmental response activities, or real property functions.
    (i) DA personnel may not release Inspector General (IG) records 
or present testimony involving information obtained through the 
performance of IG duties, except with the approval of the Secretary 
of the Army, The Inspector General (TIG), the TIG Legal Advisor, or 
the Chief, Litigation Division.

Appendix B to Part 97--Litigation Requests and Demands to the 
Department of the Navy

    A litigation request to the Department of the Navy must be 
submitted to the appropriate determining authority as defined in 
Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5820.8, ``Release of Official 
Information for Litigation Purposes and Testimony by Department of 
the Navy Personnel,'' August 27, 1991, as amended (available at 
https://www.secnav.navy.mil/doni/Directives/05000%20General%20Management%20Security%20and%20Safety%20Services/05-800%20Laws%20and%20Legal%20Services/5820.8A%20CH-1.pdf).
    As with all service of process on the Department of the Navy, a 
demand (subpoena or court order) must be delivered to the Naval 
Litigation Office using registered or certified mail, a commercial 
courier service, or a process server. The address for all service of 
process is: General Counsel of the Department of the Navy, Naval 
Litigation Office, 720 Kennon St. SE, Room 233, Washington Navy 
Yard, DC 20374-5013.
    Answers to frequently asked questions on Touhy requests are 
available at https://www.jag.navy.mil/organization/documents/Touhy_Requests.pdf. Contact the Office of the General Counsel at 
202-685-7039 or the Office of the Judge Advocate General at 202-685-
5450 with any additional questions.

Appendix C to Part 97--Litigation Requests and Demands to the 
Department of the Air Force

    A litigation request or demand to the Department of the Air 
Force must be submitted to the base-level or servicing Staff Judge 
Advocate for the installation or organization where the official 
information or witness is located.
    Should the information or witness be located in a Headquarters-
level office, the request or demand must be submitted to the 
Commercial Litigation Field Support Center (for matters involving 
contracts, acquisition, and procurement) or to the Air Force General 
Litigation Division (for all other matters). Their addresses are: 
Commercial Litigation Field Support Center, AFLOA/JAQC, 1500 W. 
Perimeter Rd., Suite 4100, Joint Base Andrews, MD 20762; Air Force 
General Litigation Division, AFLOA/JACL, 1500 W Perimeter Rd., Suite 
1370, 1st Floor, Joint Base Andrews, MD 20762.

    Dated: September 16, 2022.
Aaron T. Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2022-20433 Filed 9-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P