Opinion ID: 755736
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Kirtland OSI Report

Text: 26 Major Gowan also contends that the Kirtland OSI report should be amended. The AFBCMR amended the report to show which individuals in fact were interviewed, but denied the remainder of Major Gowan's request to amend. The district court held that under § 552a(k)(2) the Kirtland OSI report was exempted from the provisions of § 552a(d), but did not specify which § 552a(k)(2) exemption it relied upon. We agree with the district court that the Kirtland OSI report is exempted from the requirements of § 552a(d), but disagree on which exemption section to apply. However, we may affirm on any ground supported by the record. See United States v. Knox, 124 F.3d 1360, 1362 (10th Cir.1997). 27 None of the specific exemptions promulgated under § 552a(k)(2) seems to apply to the Kirtland OSI report. See 32 C.F.R. Pt. 806b, App. C(b) (1997). Besides the specific exemptions enumerated in 5 U.S.C. § 552a(k)(2), however, the Privacy Act provides that law enforcement materials generally may be exempted from otherwise applicable Privacy Act requirements. See 5 U.S.C. § 552a(j)(2). The general exemption section, § 552a(j)(2), states: 28 The head of any agency may promulgate rules ... to exempt any system of records within the agency from any part of this section except subsections (b), (c)(1) and (2), (e)(4)(A) through (F), (e)(6), (7), (9), (10), and (11), and (i) if the system of records is- 29 ... 30 (2) maintained by an agency or component thereof which performs as its principal function any activity pertaining to the enforcement of criminal laws, including police efforts to prevent, control, or reduce crime or to apprehend criminals, and the activities of prosecutors, courts, correctional, probation, pardon, or parole authorities, and which consists of ... (B) information compiled for the purpose of a criminal investigation, including reports of informants and investigators, and associated with an identifiable individual.... 31 The Air Force has promulgated regulations under § 552a(j)(2) exempting certain material from the requirements of § 552a(d), including Investigative Support Records and Criminal Records. See 32 C.F.R. Pt. 806b, App. C(a) (1997). 2 The Investigative Support Records category includes [r]eports of investigation, collection reports, statements of individuals, affidavits, correspondence, and other documentation pertaining to criminal collection activities investigative surveys ... which are used by AFOSI to determine if, in fact, possible criminal activity requiring further specialized investigation is occurring in a specific area and by USAF and other military commanders as well as Department of Justice officials to determine if judicial or administrative action is warranted. See Department of Defense System of Records Notices, 50 Fed.Reg. 22,090, 22,492 (1985). The Criminal Records system includes [r]eports of investigation, statements of individuals, correspondence, and other informational material pertaining to specific investigations of alleged violations of laws, regulations or directives which are used in taking judicial and administrative actions involving suspected criminal activity concerning [Department of Defense] personnel and to determine if legal or administrative action is warranted. See id. at 22,491. 32 The OSI report at issue fits both of these categories. It is located in a system of records maintained by the Kirtland OSI, a law enforcement body; it consists of information compiled for the purpose of a criminal investigation and associated with an identifiable individual; and it has been the subject of the proper rule-making procedures. Consequently, it is exempt under § 552a(j)(2). See Nolan, 973 F.2d at 847. As stated above, Major Gowan has no Privacy Act cause of action regarding exempted records, and thus he cannot challenge the Air Force's refusal to make further amendments to the Kirtland OSI report. See id. at 848-49.