§ 49.3 Examination of material. Material produced pursuant to the Act, while in the custody of the Custodian, shall be for the official use of officers and employees of the Department of Justice in accordance with the Act, but such material shall, upon reasonable notice to the Custodian, be made available for examination by the person who produced such material or his duly authorized representative during regular office hours established for the Department of Justice. Examination of such material at other times may be authorized by the Assistant Attorney General or the Custodian. § 49.4 Deputy Custodians. $ 50.1 Consent judgment policy. (a) It is hereby established as the policy of the Department of Justice to consent to a proposed judgment in an action to prevent or restrain violations of the antitrust laws only after or on condition that an opportunity is afforded persons (natural or corporate) who may be affected by such judgment and who are not named as parties to the action to state comments, views or relevant allegations prior to the entry of such proposed judgment by the court. (b) Pursuant to this policy, each proposed consent judgment shall be filed in court or otherwise made available upon request to interested persons as early as feasible but at least 30 days prior to entry by the court. Prior to entry of the judgment, or some earlier specified date, the Department of Justice will receive and consider any written comments, views or relevant allegations relating to the proposed judgment, which the Department may, in its discretion, disclose to the other parties to the action. The Department of Justice shall reserve the right (1) to withdraw or withhold its consent to the proposed judgment if the comments, views or allegations submitted disclose facts or considerations which indicate that the proposed judgment is inappropriate, improper or inadequate and (2) to object to intervention by any party not named as a party by the Government. (c) The Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division may establish procedures for implementing this policy. The Attorney General may permit an exception to this policy in a specific case where extraordinary circumstances require some shorter period than 30 days or some other procedure than that stated herein, and where it is clear that the public interest in the policy hereby established is not compromised. [26 F.R. 6026, July 6, 1961] § 50.2 Release of information by personnel of the Department of Justice relating to criminal proceedings. (a) General. (1) The availability to news media of information in criminal cases is a matter which has become increasingly a subject of concern in the administration of criminal justice. The purpose of this statement is to formulate specific guidelines for the release of such information by personnel of the Department of Justice. (2) While the release of information for the purpose of influencing a trial is, of course, always improper, there are valid reasons for making available to the public information about the administration of the criminal laws. The task of striking a fair balance between the protection of individuals accused of crime and public understanding of the problems of controlling crime depends largely on the exercise of sound judgment by those responsible for administering the criminal laws and by representatives of the press and other media. (3) Inasmuch as the Department of Justice has generally fulfilled its responsibilities with awareness and understanding of the competing needs in this area, this statement, to a considerable extent, reflects and formalizes the standards to which representatives of the Department have adhered in the past. Nonetheless, it will be helpful in ensuring uniformity of practice to set forth the following guidelines for all personnel of the Department of Justice. (4) Because of the difficulty and importance of the questions they raise, it is felt that some portions of the matters covered by this statement, such as the authorization to make available federal conviction records and a description of items seized at the time of arrest, should be the subject of continuing review and consideration by the Department on the basis of experience and suggestions from those within and outside the Department. (b) Guidelines. (1) These guidelines shall apply to the release of information to news media from the time a person is arrested or is charged with a criminal offense until the proceeding has been terminated by trial or otherwise. (2) At no time shall personnel of the Department of Justice furnish any statement or information for the purpose of influencing the outcome of a defendant's trial. (3) Personnel of the Department of Justice, subject to specific limitations imposed by law or court rule or order, may make public the following information: (i) The defendant's name, age, residence, employment, marital status, and similar background information. (ii) The substance or text of the charge, such as a complaint, indictment, or information. (iii) The identity of the investigating and arresting agency and the length of the investigation. (iv) The circumstances immediately surrounding an arrest, including the time and place of arrest, resistance, pursuit, possession and use of weapons, and a description of items seized at the time of arrest. Disclosures should include only incontrovertible, factual matters, and should not include subjective observations. In addition, where background information or information relating to the circumstances of an arrest would be highly prejudicial and where the release thereof would serve no law enforcement function, such information should not be made public. (4) Personnel of the Department shall not volunteer for publication any information concerning a defendant's prior criminal record. However, this is not intended to alter the Department's present policy that, since federal criminal conviction records are matters of public record permanently maintained in the Department, this information may be made available upon specific inquiry. (5) Because of the particular danger of prejudice resulting from statements in the period approaching and during trial, they ought strenuously to be avoided during that period. Any such statement or release shall be made only on the infrequent occasion when circumstances absolutely demand a disclosure of information and shall include only information which is clearly not prejudicial. (6) The release of certain types of information generally tends to create dangers of prejudice without serving a significant law enforcement function. Therefore, personnel of the Department should refrain from making available the following: (i) Observations about a defendant's character. (ii) Statements, admissions, confessions, or alibis attributable to a defendant. (iii) Reference to investigative procedures, such as fingerprints, polygraph examinations, ballistic tests, or laboratory tests. (iv) Statements concerning the identity, credibility, or testimony of prospective witnesses. (v) Statements concerning evidence or argument in the case, whether or not it is anticipated that such evidence or argument will be used at trial. (7) Personnel of the Department of Justice should take no action to encourage or assist news media in photographing or televising a defendant or accused person being held or transported in federal custody. Departmental representatives should not make available photographs of a defendant unless a law enforcement function is served thereby. (8) This statement of policy is not in tended to restrict the release of information concerning a defendant who is a fugutive from justice. (9) Since the purpose of this statement is to set forth generally applicable guidelines, there will, of course, be situations in which it will limit release of information which would not be prejudicial under the particular circumstances. If a representative of the Department believes that in the interest of the fair administration of justice and the law enforcement process information beyond these guidelines should be released in a particular case, he shall request the permission of the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General to do so. [30 F.R. 5510, Apr. 17, 1965] § 50.3 Guidelines for the enforcement of Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964. (a) Where the heads of agencies having responsibilities under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 conclude there is noncompliance with regulations issued under that title, several alternative courses of action are open. In each case, the objective should be to secure prompt and full compliance so that needed Federal assistance may commence or continue. (b) Primary responsibility for prompt and vigorous enforcement of Title VI rests with the head of each department and agency administering programs of Federal financial assistance. Title VI itself and relevant Presidential directives preserve in each agency the authority and the duty to select, from among the available sanctions, the methods best designed to secure compliance in individual cases. The decision to terminate or refuse assistance is to be made by the agency head or his designated representative. (c) This statement is intended to provide procedural guidance to the responsible department and agency officials in exercising their statutory discretion and in selecting, for each noncompliance situation, a course of action that fully conforms to the letter and spirit of section 602 of the Act and to the implementing regulations promulgated thereunder. I. ALTERNATIVE COURSES OF ACTION A. ULTIMATE SANCTIONS The ultimate sanctions under Title VI are the refusal to grant an application for assistance and the termination of assistance being rendered. Before these sanctions may be invoked, the Act requires completion of the procedures called for by section 602. That section requires the department or agency concerned (1) to determine that compliance cannot be secured by voluntary means, (2) to consider alternative courses of action consistent with achievement of the objectives of the statutes authorizing the particular financial assistance, (3) to afford the applicant an opportunity for a hearing, and (4) to complete the other procedural steps outlined in section 602, including notification to the appropriate committees of the Congress. In some instances, as outlined below, it is legally permissible temporarily to defer action on an application for assistance, pending initiation and completion of section 602 procedures-including attempts to secure voluntary compliance with Title VI. Normally, this course of action is appropriate only with respect to applications for noncontinuing assistance or initial applications for programs of continuing assistance. It is not available where Federal financial assistance is due and payable pursuant to a previously approved application. Whenever action upon an application is deferred pending the outcome of a hearing and subsequent section 602 procedures, the efforts to secure voluntary compliance and the hearing and such subsequent procedures, if found necessary, should be conducted without delay and completed as soon possible. B. AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVES 1. Court Enforcement as Compliance with the nondiscrimination mandate of Title VI may often be obtained more promptly by appropriate court action than by hearings and termination of assistance. Possibilities of judicial enforcement include (1) a suit to obtain specific enforcement of assurances, covenants running with federally provided property, statements or compliance or desegregation plans filed pursuant to agency regulations, (2) a suit to enforce compliance with other titles of the 1964 Act, other Civil Rights Acts, or constitutional or statutory provisions requiring nondiscrimination, and (3) initiation of, or intervention or other participation in, a suit for other relief designed to secure compliance. The possibility of court enforcement should not be rejected without consulting the Department of Justice. Once litigation has been begun, the affected agency should consult with the Department of Justice before taking any further action with respect to the noncomplying party. 2. Administrative Action A number of effective alternative courses not involving litigation may also be available in many cases. These possibilities include (1) consulting with or seeking assistance from other Federal agencies (such as the Contract Compliance Division of the Department of Labor) having authority to enforce nondiscrimination requirements; (2) consulting with or seeking assistance from State or local agencies having such authority; (3) bypassing a recalcitrant central agency applicant in order to obtain assurances from, or to grant assistance to complying local agencies; and (4) bypassing all recalcitrant non-Federal agencies and providing assistance directly to the complying ultimate beneficiaries. The possibility of utilizing such administrative alternatives should be considered at all stages of enforcement and used as appropriate or feasible. C. INDUCING VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE Title VI requires that a concerted effort be made to persuade any noncomplying applicant or recipient voluntarily to comply with Title VI. Efforts to secure voluntary compliance should be undertaken at the outset in every noncompliance situation and should be pursued through each stage of enforcement action. Similarly, where an applicant fails to file an adequate assurance or apparently breaches its terms, notice should be promptly given of the nature of the noncompliance problem and of the possible consequences thereof, and an immediate effort made to secure voluntary compliance. II. PROCEDURES A. NEW APPLICATIONS The following procedures are designed to apply in cases of noncompliance involving applications for one-time or noncontinuing assistance and initial applications for new or existing programs of continuing assistance. 1. Where the Requisite Assurance Has Not Been Filed or is Inadequate on its Face. Where the assurance, statement of compliance or plan of desegregation required by agency regulations has not been filed or where, in the judgment of the head of the agency in question, the filed assurance fails on its face to satisfy the regulations, the agency head should defer action on the application pending prompt initiation and completion of section 602 procedures. The applicant should be notified immediately and attempts made to secure voluntary compliance. If such efforts fail, the applicant should promptly be offered a hearing for the purpose of determining whether an adequate assurance has in fact been filed. If it is found that an adequate assurance has not been filed, and if administrative alternatives are ineffective or inappropriate, and court enforcement is not feasible, section 602 procedures may be completed and assistance finally refused. 2. Where it Appears that the Field Assurance Is Untrue or Is Not Being Honored Where an otherwise adequate assurance, statement of compliance, or plan has been filed in connection with an application for assistance, but prior to completion of action on the application the head of the agency in question has reasonable grounds, based on a substantiated complaint, the agency's own investigation, or otherwise, to believe that the representations as to compliance are in some material respect untrue or are not being honored, the agency head may defer action on the application pending prompt initiation and completion of section 602 procedures. The applicant should be notified immediately and attempts made to secure voluntary compliance. If such efforts fail and court enforcement is determined to be ineffective or inadequate, a hearing should be promptly initiated to determine whether, in fact, there is noncompliance. If noncompliance is found, and if administrative alternatives are ineffective or inappropriate and court enforcement is still not feasible, section 602 procedures may be completed and assistance finally refused. The above-described deferral and related compliance procedures would normally be appropriate in cases of an application for noncontinuing assistance. In the case of an initial application for a new or existing program of continuing assistance, deferral would often be less appropriate because of the opportunity to secure full compliance during the life of the assistance program. In those cases in which the agency does not defer action on the application, the applicant should be given prompt notice of the asserted noncompliance; funds should be paid out for short periods only, with no long-term commitment of assistance given; and the applicant advised that acceptance of the funds carries an enforceable obligation of nondiscrimination and the risk of invocation of severe sanctions, if noncompliance in fact is found. B. REQUESTS FOR CONTINUATION OR The following procedures are designed to apply in cases of noncompliance involving all submissions seeking continuation or renewal under programs of continuing assistance. In cases in which commitments for Federal financial assistance have been made prior to the effective date of Title VI regulations and funds have not been fully disbursed, or in which there is provision for future periodic payments to continue the program or activity for which a present recipient has previously applied and qualified, or in which assistance is given without formal application pursuant to statutory direction or authorization, the responsible agency may nonetheless require an assurance, statement of compliance, or plan in connection with disbursement or further funds. However, once particular program grant or loan has been made or an application for a certain type of assistance for a specific or indefinite period has been approved, no funds due and payable pursuant to that grant, loan, or application, may normally be deferred or withheld without first completing the procedures prescribed in section 602. а Accordingly, where the assurance, statement of compliance, or plan required by agency regulations has not been filed or where, in the judgment of the head of the agency in question, the filed assurance fails on its face to satisfy the regulations, or there is reasonable cause to believe it untrue or not being honored, the agency head should, if efforts to secure voluntary compliance are unsuccessful, promptly institute a hearing to determine whether an adequate assurance has in fact been filed, or whether, in fact, there is noncompliance, as the case may be. There should ordinarily be no deferral of action on the submission or withholding of funds in this class of cases, although the limitation of the payout of funds to short periods may appropriately be ordered. If noncompliance is found, and if administrative alternatives are ineffective or inappropriate and court enforcement is not feasible, section 602 procedures may be completed and assistance terminated. C. SHORT-TERM PROGRAMS Special procedures may sometimes be required where there is noncompliance with Title VI regulations in connection with a program of such short total duration that all assistance funds will have to be paid out before the agency's usual administrative procedures can be completed and where deferral in accordance with these guidelines would be tantamount to a final refusal to grant assist ance. In such a case, the agency head may, although otherwise following these guidelines, suspend normal agency procedures and institute expedited administrative proceedings to determine whether the regulations have been violated. He should simultaneously refer the matter to the Department of Justice for consideration of possible court enforcement, including interim injunctive relief. Deferral of action on an application is appropriate, in accordance with these guidelines, for a reasonable period of time, provided such action is consistent with achievement of the objectives of the statute authorizing the financial assistance in connection with the action taken. As in other cases, where noncompliance is found in the hearing proceeding, and if administrative alternatives are ineffective or inappropriate and court enforcement is not feasible, section 602 procedures may be completed and assistance finally refused. III. PROCEDURES IN CASES OF SUBGRANTEES In situations in which applications for Federal assistance are approved by some agency other than the Federal granting agency, the same rules and procedures would apply. Thus, the Federal agency should instruct the approving agency-typically a State agency-to defer approval or refuse to grant funds, in individual cases in which such action would be taken by the original granting agency itself under the above procedures. Provision should be made for appropriate notice of such action to the Federal agency which retains responsibility for compliance with section 602 procedures. IV. EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES The Attorney General should be consulted in individual cases in which the head of an agency believes that the objectives of Title VI will be best achieved by proceeding other than as provided in these guidelines. V. COORDINATION While primary responsibility for enforcement of Title VI rests directly with the head of each agency, in order to assure coordination of Title VI enforcement and consistency among agencies, the Department of Justice should be notified in advance of applications on which action is to be deferred, hearings to be scheduled, and refusals and terminations of assistance or other enforcement actions or procedures to be undertaken. The Department also should be kept advised of the progress and results of hearings and other enforcement actions. [31 F.R. 5292, Apr. 2, 1966] § 50.4 Policy with regard to inventions resulting from grants under the Law Enforcement Assistance Act of 1965. (a) The Department of Justice expends substantial sums each year in the form of grants under the Law Enforcement Assistance Act of 1965 (79 Stat. 828), as amended (80 Stat. 1506), for projects designed to develop or demonstrate effective methods for increasing the security of persons and property and controlling the incidence of lawlessness, and to promote respect for law. The scientific and technological research attributable in varying degree to this expenditure of public funds may in some cases result in patentable inventions. (b) The Department of Justice normally reserves the right to determine the disposition of the title to and rights in inventions made in the course of, or under, its law enforcement grants. However, in some cases the Department may waive that right of disposition by means of an express provision in the grant. (c) Determinations with regard to the disposition of inventions developed under grants when there are no waivers are made by the Director of the Office of Law Enforcement Assistance of the Department of Justice. (d) In all cases in which an invention is made in the course of or under a grant, the grantee is required to make a report thereof to the Director. In those cases in which there is no waiver, the Director has the responsibility for determining, and notifying the grantee, whether the Government will seek patent protection |