28 CFR 802.27 - Compliance/noncompliance.
prev | next
The General Counsel is responsible for determining if CSOSA should comply or not comply with the demand, and the Deputy Director of PSA is responsible for determining if PSA should comply with the demand.
(a) An employee may not produce any documents, or provide testimony regarding any information relating to, or based upon Agency documents, or disclose any information or produce materials acquired as part of the performance of that employee's official duties, or because of that employee's official status without prior authorization from the General Counsel or Deputy Director. The reasons for this policy are as follows:
(2) To minimize the possibility of involving the agency in controversial issues that are not related to the agency's mission;
(3) To prevent the possibility that the public will misconstrue variances between personal opinions of agency employees and agency policies;
(b) An attorney from the Office of the General Counsel shall appear with any CSOSA employee upon whom the demand has been made (and with any PSA employee if so requested by the Deputy Director), and shall provide the court or other authority with a copy of the regulations contained in this part. The attorney shall also inform the court or authority that the demand has been or is being referred for prompt consideration by the General Counsel or Deputy Director. The court or other authority will be requested respectfully to stay the demand pending receipt of the requested instructions from the General Counsel or Deputy Director.
(c) If the court or other authority declines to stay the effect of the demand pending receipt of instructions from the General Counsel or Deputy Director, or if the court or other authority rules that the demand must be complied with irrespective of the instructions from the General Counsel or Deputy Director not to produce the material or disclose the information sought, the employee upon whom the demand was made shall respectfully decline to produce the information under United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 U.S. 462 (1951). In this case, the Supreme Court held that a government employee could not be held in contempt for following an agency regulation requiring agency approval before producing government information in response to a court order.
(d) To achieve the purposes noted in paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this section, the agency will consider factors such as the following in determining whether a demand should be complied with:
(1) The Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 522a;
(2) Department of Health and Human Services statute and regulations concerning drug and alcohol treatment programs found at 42 U.S.C. 290dd and 42 CFR 2.1 et seq.;
(3) The Victims Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 10606(b);
(6) Whether disclosure is appropriate under the rules of procedure governing the case or matter in which the demand arose;
(8) Whether disclosure would reveal a confidential source or informant, unless the investigative agency and the source or informant have no objection; and
Title 28 published on 2013-07-01
no entries appear in the Federal Register after this date.