|
|
« Previous Politics | Next Politics » |
|
Defense Department Broadens Congressional Oversight of Secret Programs
ByAs House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tussles with the White House over expanded intelligence oversight, the Department of Defense quietly and subtly offered Congress an olive branch last week, setting out a formal procedure for the investigative arm of Congress, the Government Accountability Office, to be granted access to special access programs, or SAPs. The change of policy, contained in a directive issued July 1, was first noticed by the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists.
SAPs exist to provide physical protection for information, operations,
capabilities and programs that exceed the level of protection given to
information that is classified at the appropriate level.
For example, a
memorandum written by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to the White
House last year about Afghanistan policy was classified Top Secret and was transmitted to the National Security Council via an encrypted e-mail system. But it wasn't as well protected as a SAP would have been. (It leaked.) Even information that is derived from sensitive intelligence collection
techniques, known as Sensitive Compartmented Information, or SCI, are
often "less" protected than SAPs, which individually require personnel
to sign waivers acknowledging that they're "read in" to the particular
program.
If this is confusing, it's because it's meant to be confusing and
intimidating to younger people who have access to all-source
intelligence.
Pelosi wants the Government Accountability Office to oversee special
access programs across the intelligence community, including those
established by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and
the Central Intelligence Agency. The White House has vehemently
resisted GAO oversight on the grounds that it interferes with the
prerogative of the executive branch to protect national security
information.
According to the Pentagon instruction, GAO
personnel "shall be granted SAP access if" the director of the DoD
oversight committee on SAPs agrees, after receiving a request from the
chair and ranking member of either the defense or intelligence
committees, and if the GAO employee who would review the SAP has the
appropriate security clearance level.
In practice, as Secrecy
News notes, GAO personnel who work with Congress on these programs have
the clearance level, and regularly undergo a counterintelligence
polygraph to keep their clearances current. Previously, the DoD had no
formal mechanism for complying with, or refusing, congressional
requests to have the GAO investigate its secret programs.
There
are three kinds of SAPS -- open SAPs, which are acknowledged and
reported to Congress in an unclassified manner; black or "closed" SAPs,
which are reported to Congress in a classified annex to the Defense
Department budget; "waived" SAPs, which are orally briefed to the chairs and ranking members of the intelligence committees, their staff
directors, and the chairs and ranking members of the appropriations
subcommittee for defense.
Most SAPs involve technology projects. At the Department of Defense there are relatively few SAPs involving sensitive human intelligence collection or exploitation
methods. Examples of ongoing non-technology SAPs include interrogation
protocols for high-level battlefield detainees in Afghanistan managed
by the Defense Counterintelligence and HUMINT Center of the DIA, and
every single capability of all of special missions units of the Joint
Special Operations Command. One entire government agency, the National Underwater Reconaissance Office, is protected by a SAP.
SAPs are managed by security officers in charge of "Special Technical Operations."





























Join the Discussion
After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register. blog comments powered by Disqus