June 5, 1998
Re: FOIA Appeal, your letter dated May 5, 1998
Dear:
This is in response to your May 5, 1998 appeal pursuant to the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). On March 22, 1998, you requested
copies of the personnel certificates constructed from two National
Credit Union Administration vacancy announcements that closed
on February 27, 1997. You noted that the announcements were
for credit union examiner positions (job series CU 580) in St.
Louis, MO and were numbered NCUA 1-7-4001 and NCUA 1-7-4002.
On April 28, 1998, your request was denied. We received your
appeal on May 8. Your request is granted in part and denied in
part. The responsive documents are being released with names
and a telephone number redacted pursuant to exemption 6 of the
FOIA (12 U.S.C. 552b(6)). The redacted documents are enclosed.
Exemption 6 is discussed below.
Exemption 6 of the FOIA protects information about an individual
in "personnel and medical files and similar files" where
the disclosure of such information "would constitute a clearly
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(6).
The courts have held that all information which applies to a particular
individual meets the threshold requirement for exemption 6 protection.
United States Department of State v. Washington Post Co.,
456 U.S. 595 (1982). Once a privacy interest is established,
application of exemption 6 requires a balancing of the public's
right to disclosure against the individual's right to privacy.
Department of the Air Force v. Rose, 425 U.S. 352, 372
(1976). The information redacted consists of names and a telephone
number of certain applicants for NCUA positions who were not offered
jobs. These individuals have a strong privacy interest in maintaining
their confidentiality. See Core v. United States Postal
Service, 730 F.2d 946 (4th Cir. 1984). The Supreme
Court has held that the public interest in exemption 6 information
is to "shed light on an agency's performance of its statutory
duties." United States Department of Justice v. Reporters
Committee, 489 U.S. 749 (1989). The burden of establishing
that disclosure would serve the public interest is on the requester.
Carter v. United States Department of Commerce, 830 F.2d
388, 391 (D.C. Cir. 1987). No information regarding public interest
was submitted with either your initial FOIA request or your appeal.
We believe there is minimal, if any, public interest in disclosing
the individual names found on the certificates. The individuals'
privacy interests clearly outweigh any public interest in disclosure.
Therefore, the names and telephone number continue to be withheld
pursuant to exemption 6 of the FOIA. The rest of the certificates
is being released.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(B), you may seek judicial review
of this determination by filing suit to enjoin NCUA from withholding
the portions of documents withheld and to order production of
the complete documents. Such a suit may be filed in the United
States District Court in the district where you reside, where
the your is located, the District of Columbia, or where the documents
are located (the Eastern District of Virginia).
Sincerely,
Robert M. Fenner
General Counsel
GC/HMU:bhs
SSIC 3212
98-0508