of the standard is fairness to the individual. In order to assure such fairness, it is not “reasonably necessary” that all information contained in agency records be accurate. Only material and potentially injurious information need be accurat ld grant an amendment request if it determines by a preponderance of the evidence that the record is inaccurate. OMB Guidelines at 38, Source Book at 1051. The few courts that have addressed amendment claims have not articulated the standard of proof they applied. Nevertheless, they appear to have adopted the ordinary rule applicable in civil actions, imposing a preponderance of the evidence standard on the plaintiff. See, e.g., Thompson v. Department of Transportation United States Coast Guard, 547 F.Supp. 274, 281, 282-83 (S.D. Fla.1982) (<HOLDING>); Zeller v. United States, 467 F.Supp. 487,
holding that admission of relevant evidence generally not due process violation warranting habeas relief holding that based on evidence before the court plaintiff had failed to establish inaccuracy warranting amendment holding that the plaintiff had failed to show irreparable injury warranting a preliminary injunction because it had not engaged in sufficient advertising or promotional activities to achieve a reputation holding that the plaintiff had failed to produce sufficient evidence to establish constructive notice because the plaintiff did not present any evidence to establish that the oil was on the floor for any length of time holding that because plaintiff could not establish which portions of the tapes had been played in court plaintiff failed to meet his burden