SECRECY NEWS – OPM MULLS CHANGES TO SECURITY CLEARANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

The Office of Personnel Management has invited the public to comment on
proposed changes to Standard Form (SF) 86, the questionnaire that must be
filled out by all persons who are seeking a security clearance for access
to classified information.

Although critics have argued that the SF-86 is hopelessly out of date and
should be abandoned in favor of a more streamlined process, the changes
that OPM is currently considering are mostly technicalities, not a
wholesale revision.  Proposed changes include a recognition of civil unions
as a legal alternative to marriage, a clarification that use of drugs that
are illegal under federal law must be reported even if they are legal under
state law, and changes in wording and instructions for completion of the
Form.

Public comments on the changes were solicited by OPM in a March 12 Federal
Register notice.

    http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2013/03/fr-sf86.html

SF-86 is notoriously burdensome to fill out, requiring individuals to
supply detailed personal information about all places they have lived for
the past seven years, their employment history and where they went to
school, along with the name and contact information of someone who can
verify each item, as well as any criminal history record, use of illegal
drugs, and so forth.

    http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/sf86.pdf

"The SF 86 takes approximately 150 minutes to complete," the OPM notice
says.  But for many people, this seems to be an underestimate.

"I spent four hours one Saturday completing [an] SF-86," wrote John Hamre,
who was deputy secretary of defense under President Clinton, in a
Washington Post op-ed recently. ("The wrong way to weed out spies,"
Washington Post, February 20.)  His pointed criticism of the Form and the
clearance process may have inspired some of the proposed changes.

The OPM notice promises that "once entered, a respondent's complete and
certified investigative data remains secured in the e-QIP system until the
next time" the form must be completed (e.g. for clearance renewal).

But in Secretary Hamre's case this didn't happen for some reason -- his
previous Form was not saved. "The OPM apparently had no record of this
document, which was filed with that agency," he wrote, so he had to start
over from scratch.

When the SF-86 asked for a list of "all foreign travel you have undertaken
in the past 7 years," Hamre balked.  He said he had repeatedly traveled on
official business and always reported any contacts with foreign government
officials.  So "I refused to enter the information, rather than give it to
our government a second time."

As if in response to Hamre's objection, the new OPM notice says the Form's
instructions will be "amended so that the respondent need [not] report
contact related to official U.S. Government travel."

Much like the national security classification system that it supports,
the security clearance process is still predicated on cold war-era
presumptions that became obsolete decades ago. This fundamental critique
has yet to be addressed by OPM.

"Why does our government rely on forms designed in the 1950s?" Hamre
complained.  "Our country needs a system built for the 21st century.  The
current system is pathetic."

DETERRING LEAKS THROUGH POLYGRAPH TESTING

Last summer, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper directed
agencies that perform polygraph tests to include a "pre-test dialogue"
about the need to prevent leaks of classified information as part of the
polygraph interview process.

In a July 2012 memorandum to agencies, he said that the CIA's polygraph
program exemplified what he had in mind.

"During the pre-test discussion, CIA specifically asks whether an
individual has provided classified information or facilitated access to
classified information to any unauthorized persons, to include the media,
unauthorized U.S. persons, or foreign nationals.  The polygraph process is
also used to identify deliberate disclosures," DNI Clapper wrote.  Other
agencies that perform polygraph testing should follow procedures similar to
CIA's, he said.

"Aggressive action is required to better equip United States Government
elements to prevent unauthorized disclosures," DNI Clapper wrote.

The new policy was announced last June, but the implementing July 2012
memorandum was only released this week in response to Freedom of
Information Act requests.  See "Deterring and Detecting Unauthorized
Disclosures, Including Leaks to the Media, Through Strengthened Polygraph
Programs," July 13, 2012:

    http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/intel/leak-poly.pdf

A copy of the memorandum was also obtained by Jason Leopold of
Truthout.org, who reported on it yesterday.

    http://truth-out.org/news/

LEAKS: WHY THE GOVERNMENT CONDEMNS AND CONDONES THEM

Leaks of classified information and the government's responses to them are
the subject of a new study by David Pozen of Columbia Law School.

The starting point for his examination is the "dramatic disconnect between
the way our laws and our leaders condemn leaking in the abstract and the
way they condone it in practice."  How can this disconnect be understood?

Leaks benefit the government, the author argues, in many ways. They are a
safety valve, a covert messaging system, a perception management tool, and
more.  Even when a particular disclosure is unwelcome or damaging, it
serves to validate the system as a whole.

This thesis may explain why the number of leak prosecutions is still lower
than might be expected, given the prevalence of leaks, and why new
legislative proposals to combat leaks have met with a lukewarm response
from executive branch officials.

"The leak laws are so rarely enforced not only because it is hard to
punish violators, but also because key institutional actors share
overlapping interests in maintaining a permissive culture of classified
information disclosures."

The article is full of stimulating observations woven into an original and
provocative thesis.  See "The Leaky Leviathan: Why the Government Condemns
and Condones Unlawful Disclosures of Information" by David Pozen, to be
published in Harvard Law Review:

    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2223703

_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

The Secrecy News Blog is at:
     http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, go to:
     http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/subscribe.html

To UNSUBSCRIBE, go to
     http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/unsubscribe.html

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

Secrecy News is archived at:
     http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

Support the FAS Project on Government Secrecy with a donation:
     http://www.fas.org/member/donate_today.html

_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web:    www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email:  saftergood@fas.org
voice:  (202) 454-4691
twitter: @saftergood