SCI DUE PROCESS PROCEDURES

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP96M01138R000900010052-3
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 11, 2006
• Sequence Number: 52
• Publication Date: November 25, 1980
• Content Type: MF

M04OP.MDUM FOP. CHAIM-LU114, DCI SECURITY COMMITTEE
SUBJECT: SCI Due Process Procedures
On November 13, 1980, the DCI Security Committee by a vote of
9 to 3, approved the draft of Annex B, "DCID 1/14 Appeals Pro-
cedures," for transmission to the NFIE. While the Office of
the Secretary of Defense (OSD) supports implementation of an
SCI due process procedure, draft Annex B as approved, potentially
imposes a significant additional administrative and financial
burden on the military services and is, therefore, unacceptable.
The OSD objections to the draft Annex B center on two primary
concerns:
(1) Equity and fairness dictate that a statement of reasons
be provided before denial of SCI access occurs. Such
a provision would afford the individual concerned an
opportunity to respond to the allegations supporting
the denial with additional information which might
refute or mitigate the information upon which the denial
or revocation is predicated. Notifying a person of the
fact of a SCI denial without the reasons imposes a chill-
ing sect on the person's ability to obtain appropriate
due process remedies. The military services have
successfully employed this concept for many years with
collateral clearances.
(2) An equitable appeals procedure does not necessarily
require a personal appearance. A written notification
of intent to deny or revoke access accompanied by the
reasons therefore, an opportunity to reply in writing
.__ and the oppor-
tunity to appeal an adverse ruling to a higher authority
satisfies, in our opinion, the test of equity and fair-
ness. Since the DoD has approximately 100,000 SCI
billets, a greater number than any other member agency
of the intelligence community, the burden of a personal
appearance would weigh most heavily on Defense. Each
year a large number of applicants and incumbents, looted.
all over the world, are denied SCI access. If only a
small percentage requested a personal appearance, the
financial impact on the military departments and DoD
agencies would be considerable. It is anticipated that
such a procedure would significantly delay an already
lengthy clearance process, degrade an agency's ability
to discharge its mission and cause the subject consider-
able hardship.
On file OSD release instructions apply.
 Therefore, OSD recommends that draft Annex B be rejected and the
following wording substituted:
"Each Senior Intelligence Officer shall establish formal
procedures to ensure that individuals to be denied access
to SCI are notified of the impending denial and the reasons
therefor, and are afforded a reasonable opportunity to
respond prior to denial of such access."
The above wording has the advantage of allowing each SIC some
latitude in implementing due process when considering unique
aspects of his agency's operation, while at the same time pro-
viding commonality on the key due process elements of notice,
reasons for denial and the opportunity to respond. By adopting
such a policy, the intelligence community would be in conformance
with recent legal trends and would insure just and equitable
treatment of applicants and employees.
It is requested that the OSD position as outlined in this memorandum
be forwarded to the members of the NFIB for consideration along with
the draft Annex B to DCID 1/14.
Maynard C. Anderson
Assistant Director,
Counterintelligence & Security
Policy
PRNelson/sg/25 Nov 80
Subj Chron Pink
proved Fir Repase:007 D112;4 CFIQP86M;(~ 138000000?05