f which would reveal investigative practices, which, if disclosed, would assist violators and potential violators in circumventing the laws and regulations, avoiding detection and evading apprehension (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(2)).

HQ 585742 June 1, 1999 DIS-3 RR:DL 585742 DLD Kevin B. Faga, Esq. Attorney at Law 19-02 Whitestone Expressway, Suite 401 Whitestone, New York 11357 Dear Mr. Faga: This is in response to your letter of February 5, 1999, in which you appeal, on behalf of your client Nikolaos Fillas, the partial denial under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA, 5 U.S.C. 552) and Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a), of his request of November 23, 1998, for records pertaining to himself. On November 21, 1998, Mr. Fillas had been detained by Customs at JFK Airport upon his return from Greece. On January 6, 1999, in response to the initial request of November 23, 1998, the Executive Director, Administration, Planning and Policy of the Office of Investigations, released one Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS) record with some material withheld pursuant to Exemptions (b)(2), (b)(7)(C) and (b)(7)(D) of the FOIA (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(2), (b)(7)(C) and (b)(7)(D)). On January 13, 1999, the Special Agent in Charge, New York, New York, informed you that that office had no additional records responsive to Mr. Fillas’ request. We affirm the determination of the Executive Director of January 6, 1999. The information redacted under Exemptions (b)(2), (b)(7)(C) and (b)(7)(D) was properly withheld and nothing further can be released. FOIA Exemption (b)(2) was employed in the initial release to withhold case and file numbers and other administrative markings which pertain to the administrative practices of the agency and do not pertain to you. It was also employed to withhold information, the disclosure of which would reveal investigative practices, which, if disclosed, would assist violators and potential violators in circumventing the laws and regulations, avoiding detection and evading apprehension (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(2)). Exemption (b)(7)(C) of the FOIA permits the withholding of information compiled for law enforcement purposes, the disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(7)(C)). The names of Customs officers and other third parties were redacted to preserve their personal privacy. Exemption (b)(7)(D) of the FOIA pertains to information compiled for law enforcement purposes to the extent that the production of such information could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source, or any private institution which furnished information on a confidential basis (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(7)(D)). The Executive Director also stated in his letter of January 6, 1999, that Mr. Fillas can expect to receive no special attention from Customs upon entering the country in the future. With regard to the January 13, 1999, letter from the Special Agent in Charge (SAC), New York, we can affirm his statement that there are no more records in Customs possession responsive to Mr. Fillas’ request. You may obtain judicial review of this decision pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(B) in the United States District Court in the District in which you reside or have a principal place of business, or in which the agency records are situated, or in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Sincerely, Lee H. Kramer, FOIA Appeals Officer Disclosure Law Branch