72114 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 238 / Monday, December 13, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

long. 105°30′02′′ W.; to lat. 32°15′00′′ N., 

long. 105°42′02′′ W.; to lat. 32°15′00′′ N., 

long. 106°10′02′′ W.; to lat. 32°28′00′′ N., 

long. 106°02′00′′ W.; to lat. 32°27′00′′ N., 

long. 106°00′02′′ W.; to lat. 32°36′00′′ N., 

long. 106°00′00′′ W.; to lat. 32°45′00′′ N., 

long. 105°59′02′′ W.; to the point of 

beginning, excluding that airspace within a 2 

NM radius of lat. 32°39′00′′ N., long. 

105°41′00′′ W.; from the surface to 1,500’

AGL and also excluding that airspace 

beginning at lat. 32°42′49′′ N., long. 

105°48′11′′ W.; to lat. 32°41′00′′ N., long. 

105°50′00′′ W.; to lat. 32°40′00′′ N., long. 

105°48′00′′ W.; to lat. 32°41′48′′ N., long. 

105°46′12′′ W.; to the point of beginning from 

the surface to 1,500′′ above the surface. 

Designated altitudes. Surface to unlimited.

* * * * *

R–5103D McGregor, NM (Revoked)

* * * * *

Issued in Washington, DC, December 2, 

2004. 

Reginald C. Matthews, 

Manager, Airspace and Rules.

[FR Doc. 04–27220 Filed 12–10–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

28 CFR Part 16 

[AAG/A Order No. 018–2004] 

Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation

AGENCY: Criminal Division, Department 

of Justice.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Criminal Division (CRM), 

Department of Justice (the Department), 

is exempting the Privacy Act system of 

records entitled ‘‘Organized Crime Drug 

Enforcement Task Force Fusion Center 

System,’’ JUSTICE/CRM–028, from the 

subsections of the Privacy Act listed 

below, for the reasons set forth in the 

following text. The system of records 

was published in the Federal Register

on October 18, 2004 (69 FR 61403).

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is 

effective December 13, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Cahill, (202) 307–1823.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Department is exempting ‘‘Organized 

Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force 

Fusion Center System,’’ JUSTICE/CRM–

028, from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) and (4); 

(d)(1), (2), (3), and (4); (e)(1), (2), (3), (5), 

and (8); and (g), pursuant to the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) and/or (k). 

On October 18, 2004 (69 FR 61323), 

a proposed rule was published in the 

Federal Register with an invitation to 

comment. No comments were received. 

This order relates to individuals 

rather than small business entities. 

Nevertheless, pursuant to the 

requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, this 

order will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities.

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 16 

Administrative Practices and 

Procedures, Courts, Freedom of 

Information, Sunshine Act and Privacy.

■ Pursuant to the authority vested in the 

Attorney General by 5 U.S.C. 552a and 

delegated to me by Attorney General 

Order No. 793–78, amend 28 CFR part 16 

as follows:

PART 16—[AMENDED]

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 16 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a, 552b(g), 

and 553; 18 U.S.C. 4203(a)(1); 28 U.S.C. 509, 

510, 534; 31 U.S.C. 3717 and 9701.

■ 2. Section 16.91 is amended by adding 

paragraphs (u) and (v) as follows:

§ 16.91 Exemption of Criminal Division 

Systems—limited access, as indicated.

* * * * *

(u) The following system of records is 

exempted pursuant to the provisions of 

5 U.S.C. 552a(j) and/or (k) from 

subsections (c)(3) and (4); (d)(1), (2), (3), 

and (4); (e)(1), (2), (3), (5), and (8); and 

(g) of 5 U.S.C. 552a: Organized Crime 

Drug Enforcement Task Force Fusion 

Center System (JUSTICE/CRM–028). 

These exemptions apply only to the 

extent that information in this system is 

subject to exemption pursuant to 5 

U.S.C. 552a(j) and/or (k). 

(v) Exemptions from the particular 

subsections are justified for the 

following reasons: 

(1) From subsection (c)(3) because to 

provide the subject with an accounting 

of disclosures of records in this system 

could inform that individual of the 

existence, nature, or scope of an actual 

or potential law enforcement or 

counterintelligence investigation by the 

Organized Crime Drug Enforcement 

Task Force Fusion Center or the 

recipient agency, and could permit that 

individual to take measures to avoid 

detection or apprehension, to learn the 

identity of witnesses and informants, or 

to destroy evidence, and would 

therefore present a serious impediment 

to law enforcement or 

counterintelligence efforts. In addition, 

disclosure of the accounting would 

amount to notice to the individual of the 

existence of a record. Moreover, release 

of an accounting may reveal information 

that is properly classified pursuant to 

Executive Order 12958 (or successor or 

prior Executive Order) or a statute and 

could compromise the national defense 

or foreign policy. 

(2) From subsection (c)(4) because this 

subsection is inapplicable to the extent 

that an exemption is being claimed for 

subsection (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4). 

(3) From subsection (d)(1) because 

disclosure of records in the system 

could alert the subject of an actual or 

potential criminal, civil, or regulatory 

violation of the existence of that 

investigation, of the nature and scope of 

the information and evidence obtained 

as to his activities, of the identity of 

confidential witnesses and informants, 

of the investigative interest of Organized 

Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force 

Fusion Center and other intelligence or 

law enforcement agencies (including 

those responsible for civil proceedings 

related to laws against drug trafficking 

or related financial crimes); lead to the 

destruction of evidence, improper 

influencing of witnesses, fabrication of 

testimony, and/or flight of the subject; 

reveal the details of a sensitive 

investigative or intelligence technique, 

or the identity of a confidential source; 

or otherwise impede, compromise, or 

interfere with investigative efforts and 

other related law enforcement and/or 

intelligence activities. In addition, 

disclosure could invade the privacy of 

third parties and/or endanger the life, 

health, and physical safety of law 

enforcement personnel, confidential 

informants, witnesses, and potential 

crime victims. Access to records could 

also result in the release of information 

properly classified pursuant to 

Executive Order 12958 (or successor or 

prior Executive Order) or by statute, 

thereby compromising the national 

defense or foreign policy. 

(4) From subsection (d)(2) because 

amendment of the records thought to be 

incorrect, irrelevant, or untimely would 

also interfere with ongoing 

investigations, criminal or civil law 

enforcement proceedings, and other law 

enforcement activities and impose an 

impossible administrative burden by 

requiring investigations, analyses, and 

reports to be continuously 

reinvestigated and revised. 

(5) From subsections (d)(3) and (4) 

because these subsections are 

inapplicable to the extent exemption is 

claimed from (d)(1) and (2). 

(6) From subsection (e)(1) because, in 

the course of its acquisition, collation, 

and analysis of information under the 

statutory authority granted to it, the 

Organized Crime Drug Enforcement 

Task Force Fusion Center will 

occasionally obtain information 

concerning actual or potential violations 

of law that are not strictly within its 

statutory or other authority or may

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 238 / Monday, December 13, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 72115

compile information in the course of an 

investigation which may not be relevant 

to a specific prosecution. It is 

impossible to determine in advance 

what information collected during an 

investigation will be important or 

crucial to the apprehension of fugitives. 

In the interests of effective law 

enforcement, it is necessary to retain 

such information in this system of 

records because it can aid in 

establishing patterns of criminal activity 

and can provide valuable leads for 

federal and other law enforcement 

agencies. This consideration applies 

equally to information acquired from, or 

collated or analyzed for, both law 

enforcement agencies and agencies of 

the U.S. foreign intelligence community 

and military community. 

(7) From subsection (e)(2) because in 

a criminal, civil, or regulatory 

investigation, prosecution, or 

proceeding, the requirement that 

information be collected to the greatest 

extent practicable from the subject 

individual would present a serious 

impediment to law enforcement because 

the subject of the investigation, 

prosecution, or proceeding would be 

placed on notice as to the existence and 

nature of the investigation, prosecution, 

and proceeding and would therefore be 

able to avoid detection or apprehension, 

to influence witnesses improperly, to 

destroy evidence, or to fabricate 

testimony. Moreover, thorough and 

effective investigation and prosecution 

may require seeking information from a 

number of different sources. 

(8) From subsection (e)(3) (to the 

extent applicable) because the 

requirement that individuals supplying 

information be provided a form stating 

the requirements of subsection (e)(3) 

would constitute a serious impediment 

to law enforcement in that it could 

compromise the existence of a 

confidential investigation or reveal the 

identity of witnesses or confidential 

informants and endanger their lives, 

health, and physical safety. The 

individual could seriously interfere 

with undercover investigative 

techniques and could take appropriate 

steps to evade the investigation or flee 

a specific area. 

(9) From subsection (e)(5) because the 

acquisition, collation, and analysis of 

information for law enforcement 

purposes from various agencies does not 

permit a determination in advance or a 

prediction of what information will be 

matched with other information and 

thus whether it is accurate, relevant, 

timely and complete. With the passage 

of time, seemingly irrelevant or 

untimely information may acquire new 

significance as further investigation 

brings new details to light and the 

accuracy of such information can often 

only be determined in a court of law. 

The restrictions imposed by subsection 

(e)(5) would restrict the ability of 

trained investigators, intelligence 

analysts, and government attorneys to 

exercise their judgment in collating and 

analyzing information and would 

impede the development of criminal or 

other intelligence necessary for effective 

law enforcement. 

(10) From subsection (e)(8) because 

the individual notice requirements of 

subsection (e)(8) could present a serious 

impediment to law enforcement by 

revealing investigative techniques, 

procedures, evidence, or interest and 

interfering with the ability to issue 

warrants or subpoenas, and could give 

persons sufficient warning to evade 

investigative efforts. 

(11) From subsection (g) because this 

subsection is inapplicable to the extent 

that the system is exempt from other 

specific subsections of the Privacy Act. 

(12) In addition, exemption is claimed 

for this system of records from 

compliance with the following 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a pursuant to 

the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(k): 

subsections (c)(3), (d), (e)(1), to the 

extent that the records contained in this 

system are specifically authorized to be 

kept secret in the interests of national 

defense and foreign policy.

Dated: December 6, 2004. 

Paul R. Corts, 

Assistant Attorney General for 

Administration.

[FR Doc. 04–27237 Filed 12–10–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–14–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[VA155–5081; FRL–7847–4] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia 

NOX RACT Determinations for Two 

Individual Sources

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 

submitted by the Commonwealth of 

Virginia (Virginia or the 

Commonwealth). The revisions consist 

of reasonably available control 

technology (RACT) determinations for 

the control of nitrogen oxides (NOX) 

from two individual sources located in 

Fairfax County, Virginia; namely, the 

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and 

the National Reconnaissance Office 

(NRO). EPA is approving these revisions 

to establish and impose RACT 

requirements in accordance with the 

Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is 

effective on January 12, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents 

relevant to this action are available for 

public inspection during normal 

business hours at the Air Protection 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; and 

the Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality, 629 East Main 

Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose 

Quinto, (215) 814–2182, or by e-mail at 

quinto.rose@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On April 19 and 21, 2004, the Virginia 

Department of Quality (DEQ) submitted 

formal SIP revisions to establish RACT 

for two individual sources of NOX

located in Fairfax County, Virginia. The 

Virginia DEQ determined and imposed 

RACT under the Commonwealth’s SIPapproved generic NOX RACT 

regulations, 9 VAC 5–40–310 and 9 VAC 

5–40–311. Generic RACT regulations are 

regulations that do not, themselves, 

specifically define RACT for a source or 

source category but instead establish 

procedures for imposing case-by-case 

RACT determinations. The 

Commonwealth’s SIP-approved generic 

NOX RACT regulations consist of the 

procedures DEQ uses to establish and 

impose RACT for subject sources of 

NOX. Pursuant to the SIP-approved 

generic RACT rules, DEQ imposes 

RACT on each subject source in an 

enforceable document, usually a permit 

or order. The Commonwealth then 

submits these permits or orders to EPA 

for approval as source-specific SIP 

revisions. EPA approved Virginia’s 

generic NOX RACT regulations on April 

28, 1999 (64 FR 22792). 

On September 9, 2004 (69 FR 54574), 

EPA published a direct final rule (DFR) 

approving as SIP revisions DEQ-issued 

operating permits which establish and 

require RACT for the CIA (Operating 

Permit Registration No. 71757), and the 

NRO (Operating Permit Registration No. 

71988). A detailed description of the 

RACT determinations and EPA’s 

rationale for approving them were 

provided in the September 9, 2004 DFR 

and will not be restated herein. In 

accordance with direct final rulemaking 

procedures, on September 9, 2004 (69