PLANS TO INCREASE SYSTEMATIC DECLASSIFICATION REVIEW AT NARS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP87-00181R000100080006-4
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 37
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 28, 2010
• Sequence Number: 6
• Publication Date: May 14, 1984
• Content Type: MEMO

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
? U-P4-L-L-H-J-5-1-r-1-L-ll ?
14 May 1984
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Information Services
FROM: Chief, Classification Review Division
SUBJECT: Plans to Increase Systematic
Declassification Review at NABS
1. On 11 May 1984, Mr. Alan Thompson, Chief of the Declassification
Review Division at NABS, provided Chief, CRD with copies of the Records
Declassification Task Force Report dated 30 March 1984 (attached) and a
letter from the Archivist of the United States concerning the implementation
of the recommendations in that report (attached). The message that
Mr. Thompson wanted CIA to have was that the resources devoted to the Declas-
sification Review Program at NABS will increase by ten persons in FY 84, by
another 20 persons in FY 85, and by still another 30 persons in FY 86. This
will bring the Declassification Review Division at NABS up to 102 persons,
which will dramatically increase the productivity of the NABS Declassification
Review Program. How these additional resources will be used has not been
decided. They might be used to review material requested by researchers,
thus enabling NABS to widen the amount of material responsive to a researcher's
request, or they might conduct a Systematic Declassification Review Program as
they did in the past. In either case, these personnel increases will bring
the program back to the levels employed during E.O. 12065 which will require
additional support from other national security agencies. Mr. Thompson wanted
CIA to be aware of the anticipated increases.
2. NABS does not review intelligence files until they are 50 years
old, which means that they will not be reviewing such files for many more
years to come. Nevertheless, there are many other files which contain
information of interest to CIA. For example, the State files for the period
1950-54 contain information of interest to CIA. These are being reviewed
jointly by State and NABS and they hope to complete this review by March
1986. If the review is not completed by that date, NABS plans to continue
on its own to complete the review. They also hope that State will agree
to continue the same arrangement for the files 1955-59. Some of the files
from the 1950-54 period that remain to be reviewed and may contain infor-
mation of interest to CIA are Department Log files such as one titled "The
Embassy in Moscow," and another titled "Guatemala."
U-N-C-L-A-S-S-I-F-I-E-D
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R000100080006-4
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
? U-1V-l.-L-A-J-J-1-V-1-t-V ?
3. In the past when NARS had 100 employees doing systematic'declas-
sification review, it required teams of two or three CRD reviewers going
one day weekly to NARS and to the Washington National Records Center to
keep abreast of the work load. It can be expected that the same level of
support will be required in the future. The Agency's policy has been that
we want to review all information of interest to CIA. If we are to maintain
this policy, we may have to increase the level of support to NABS over the
next few years.
A
Chief ,
Classification Review Division
Attachments;
As Stated
DDA/OIS/CRD/ I(14 May 84)
Distribution;
Orig - Addressee w/atts
1 - RMD w/o atts
- CRD Liaison w/NARS w/atts
1 - CRD Chrono w/o atts
2
U-N-C-L-A-S-S-I-F-I-E-D
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R000100080006-4
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
5 th
e and
ii_) A inistration Records Service Wash! on, DC 20408
Date : 9 MAY 1984
Repyto Archivist of the United States - N
Attn of :
Subject: Records Declassification Task Force Report
Assistant Archivist for the National Archives - NN
Assistant Archivist for Program Support - NA
Assistant Archivist for Presidential Libraries - NL
After carefully reviewing the report (copy attached) and recommendations of the
task force on the records declassification program, I am directing that the
following actions be taken with all due speed:
1. NN is to establish systems-and procedures for maintaining accurate
information on classified, accessioned holdings and on the classification
status and level of projected accessions.
2. NN is to instruct all custodial units that security classification shall
not be. used as the sole factor for delaying the accessioning of permanently
valuable records. Additionally, NN is to insure that there is continued close
cooperation between NND and the custodial units in planning and executing
declassification and archival projects which impact on the systematic
declassification review program.
opportunity to comment? on;,tne aeciassirication plans.:::.,
records which will be systematically reviewed far ,declassification. J.L. e plan .try'
shall provide for informing such groups. insufficient t t t-1 k ey Have ,.
3. NN shall develop a plan for informing constituent groups of the series of
stable, productive workforce for the declassification program. Also NN should
investigate the feasibility of hiring NND personnel with a Secret clearance and
having them work only on records classified through the Secret level.
4. NN is to work with EPSN to develops ways' of attraetingg'and,!h tiztain n a'
be added to the NND staff in FY 84, and an additional 20 positions shall be
added in FY 85. These increases are to..be over and above the control totals
5. Working with NA, NN is to begin increasing staff resources in FY 84 with
the. objective of increasing the staff to 102 FTE in FY 86. NN shall request
this level of resources in the FY 86 budget. A minimum of 10 positions shall
I would like to'receive v
-.'pl:a
1984. I look forward? to a
*-i
program and feel confidentthese jb r :LZ 'resu ,t' in `tkta `;
i A'U,1' ,i~//~/Y7~f?~t '' c l~ try Cl,,~i~'r, if ~~S i
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R000100080006-4
t f"o em ntat '~~ri ' fib
te4 yr C ~'; i
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
Date
Reply to
Attn of
General
` Services Nationahives and 0
Administration Records Service Washington, DC 20408
h A R 3 1~S4
Office of Program Support (NA)
Records Declassification Task Force Report
Archivist of the United States (N)
Attached is the task force report on the records declassifi-
cation program. The report makes several recommendations
designed to improve the program and eliminate the problems
associated with staffing. Most important, however, is the
recommendation to restore the program to its FY 1981
resource level to ensure that NARS meets its responsibili-
ties under Executive Order 12356 to respond to special
requests and to systematically make records available for
research.
FERRIS STOVEL (NCW)
'~
, C Ys~~ t} Fr sf `#~1~, f-.,
~ 1 I 4a .,
{ +'''{i y 1
.
,
1
{aa~~ltYf~f491;I~f1~ (''{14lM~5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R000100080006-4
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
RECORDS DECLASSIFICATION
TASK FORCE REPORT
Nat i o n a1 A `4 'v," 41 t o t
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R000100080006-4
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
?
Table of Contents
Page
Executive Summary ---------------------------------
Background -------=-------------------------------- 1
History of the Program---------------------------- 1
Records Declassification Program
Since FY 1981------------------------------------- 3
Task Force Review ---------------------------------
Workload assessment------------------------- 7
Policy issues----------=-=------------------
Records Declassification Priorities--------- 10
,Tunover ----
Personnel
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R000100080006-4
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
Executive Summary
Background
The Task Force review focused on the records declassifica-
tion program since 1980, with particular emphasis on ways to
increase the amount of records reviewed for declassification
and the program's ability to meet the requirements of
Executive Order 12356
Issues evaluated by the Task Force included 1) the backlog
of records to be reviewed and the impact of future
accessions; 2) policies relating to accessioning classified
records and declassifying arranged versus unarranged
records; 3) methods for establishing declassification
priorities; 4) personnel turnover and staffing alternatives;
5) declassification procedures, organization and location;
and 6) funding levels for the declassification program.
Findings and Recommendations
1 The task. force .`found ;that 'NARS ,did` not have complete
done, which indicated that over'i,53 000 ?,cub'ic feet Qv IA3.. 9
declassification , eview v Consequet t?ly., "`a...gene;ral survey was
? . r9 . .wa x
on< the volume, a `mater.ial in. MARS requi.r
-information
.of records offeated -th:a; decs:~.o,n. ta;;a.cssi.pu them. Al o,
million pages require review. The task force recommends
that the information be kept up to date and that NND be
infoxmed when changes occur to permit realistic
declassification program planning.
2. Policies relating to accessioning declassified records
and the declassification review of arranged versus
unarranged records were found to be inconsistent or not
clearly defined. In some cases the declassification status
brAe1nde Aj.
recommends that -a. 0gris i'stent of icy ' be es tabli shed, in, NN to!
gal
a ,< {< < '..1.'.
work ; created. ' p obl ms wt en , b gt~ent~ a rs gem~mz
constituent groups ,,i,nn. the. priority setting process so that
WA'RS' e.hoicea woul'd'. be: corifirlmed or appr'opriat'ely, ,modified.:
3 Currently', .decl,as.sifi10atvan~', r~ibr ,ets~ 'Y est`ab1. h` 1 ~'~ c !%, i.
based' on s'taf 'judgment bncerivi'ca~ arri pated r,e`seatckt
interest. The task force found nothing wrong with this but
recommends that various methods be tried to involve
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R000100080006-4
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
? ?
4. Chronic personnel turnover and staffing problems are
believed by the task force to be one of the most serious
impediments to a stable, productive program. The task force
recommends staffing alternatives that might allievate some
of the problems of the past in future staffing efforts.
These involve a mix of different appointments and the use of
secret instead of top secret security clearances for some
personnel.
5. The task force reviewed current procedures, the
organization of the program, and the location of work
primarily in Washington and concluded that no changes were
necessary. While moving a major portion of the program.to a
more attractive employment area seemed desirable initially,
there are simply too many problems to make it practical.
The task force recommends that NND remain a separate
division to continue to give the program the necessary
visibility.
6. Current resource levels are clearly inadequate to enable
NARS to meet the requirements of Executive Order 12356. The
task force found that amide `'from k e aState Depa tment
project, which .is two girds reia~ursable,.,ve the
'
~,, x,,
systematic rev, i'es be
ng done. + .The tas ztfo ce oAmae ~d
This would permit at least 5 million 'pages to be
declassified each year, which should be sufficient to meet
rese4rch demand. A follow up evaluation of the program at
the increased level should be made in FY 1988, to verify or
recommend changes in the resource level.
>'~i~+ dw`(: > ;; `+ l5 ,~~~S~i 6 r.j~t ~ (t;?. tii):11( f ~~ ; 'c )~, ~i!'t,'!'ir. ~l'tl tit.t.~.~
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R000100080006-4
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
Table I shows the budget, staffing and workload
accomplishments from the start of the program in FY 1973
thru FY 1983. Also shown are estimates for FY 1984 and FY
1985. It should be noted that no siginificant increase in
resources was allocated to the program to meet the 20 year
review requirement set by Executive Order 12065. The 1979
to 1980 increase was largely due to the allocation of
Standard Level User Charges (SLUC) to the programs in NARS
and did not represent a significant increase in the program
dollars available. FY 1980 and 1981 did, however, represent
the peak years in the, declassification program. Approxi-
mately $200,000 and 8 FTE in each FY in Table 1 are
associated with the declassification of Presidential Library
Materials.
Records Declassification Program Since FY 1981
Executive Order 12356 issued on April 2, 1982, attempted to
correct some of the problems with Executive Order 12065 as
addressed in the final GAO report. Under Executive Order
12356, NARS responds first to requests for records made
under the Freedom of Information Act and the mandatory
review :provision l Qf they x cnt ve a dez.; }ARemain~,n
r d vd ed O ' y s a ~ ~rf e~,rsr > f:csr
espurceS are.',
ayeac.y I: U.LU i a-a~a }bra v....-GV?; ..t. ,r ~r~'*' t -t.,~,r - .~ 5 ,1:
declasifcaist~')a ecs's}>ti'~..~t~rn xe~xout~;ve
s'hips' pr; subma vines.:
missile defense,. in;formatt&Q ?aqd rzu,clear-;p ower,ed.;surf:ace
The overall program approach and the guidelines do not
differ greatly from those in force under E.O. 12065 except:
(1) the guidelines are for the systematic review of US and
foreign government information in records 30 years old or
older, and (2) there are a number of new categories of
information identified for agency determination, such as
counter intelligence/ counter-terrorism, protection of
officials, confidential sources, space systems, ballistic
stbj ec,t' macttez Pti~st; ` ; to mare > re
~..:I;~'Catd o j ,
the., Aearl.y :oa1d#?; 1c'~'i,ty?-A~-~~~"orrl~,a;qet,,; l;, , ;,;..;, {..,t `,,.
, ~is '!` ~? ~..
Consequently, most records created in the 1950's require
page-by-page review and the incident of documents withdrawn
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R000100080006-4
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
? ?
TABLE I - Records Declassification Program
(Source: GSA Budget Digest and
FY 1985 Congressional Budget)
Obligations
($000) FTE
1973 780 57
1974 1011 83
1975 1282 95
1976 1281 101
Transition Qtr. 432 24
1977 1377 87
1978 1519 97
Workload
Pages Completed (000's)
30,000
45,542
63,000
56,500
12,500
40,000
38,300
pages (pp) class pp.
1979*
1980
1981
1982
**reimbursable
1983
**reimbursable
est. 1984
**reimbursable
;Q xx ;; 14 800 r; ' 0, 200,
936
31
8,200
2,000
1,900
310
16
1,700
1,000
900
910
37,.
,2,500.
1,300
1,100,
345
19
1,500
1,000
All obligations, FTE"s, a.r}d wp~k'l~aad;p.i>Q.t: to _F. ts~4~t7~ ,1 S?r 1`t
d
. The., G40,,# i
basis those
,
by researcher
systematic c,l:as:sif 4;ca:i':
sheer', . volume of: &te
records over 30%~~r~t.rspi#
should be the primary determinate in
cation review.
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
W
Methods of determining researcher demand vary widely. NND
monitors usage of record groups of specific series via the
FOIA/Mandatory/Special Logs; the NN staff, using different
methods in different units, tracks researcher demand via
reference service slips, and conversations and correspond-
ence with researchers; and the staff generally keeps abreast
of reseracher trends through professional contacts. The
primary ingredient in all of these has been and continues to
be the judgment of the NARS professional staff. It might
be possible, with the expenditure of many staff hours, to
develop a more objective method. At this point, however, we
do not believe that the results would differ significantly
from current procedures for developing such planning
information.
While we do not question the method, there are ways to
verify the choices. It should be noted that the appraisal
task force also addressed "researcher interest". That
task force, while not disputing the priorities set by
the professional staff, noted that it might be worthwhile to
run a test to attempt to quantify interest and then to
compare the results with the impressions held by the staff.
If such a test s. run ~t t. shoo .d; inc orate. dec],ass ,ic tion
~. d S q .+ w ~- s. ?,^x (1 R r a - , tfi t tin ?r ' + r t ?(~
project plannih', hies asr~ res t 1y rdeveloped.' K?a 1~i, , ?wU
y rvi, g" a '-ti 5 r, dttfty, ~ry,.t 3t t k ,a?6x r 1 4.. 4h, 3 ti a t ., ~
e.n" t'h)'f6ftlJ Q^'U-. 'U,Yf , a 4 ~. K;.'r ~ttrt'~s~w # s"}ELr }tj: t:~l f {giitrW
Constituent g~ou ~` av t ~i g8~ ~~ ." .s 1n e
dl. { t i r,+f t{ 5$c i .tt X f 1
declassification voce t'and'c u + ~ .r:bvr't e"' dvi e n.' ~ '~ ~~ ?0..;+
researcher demand/interest to be used in setting priorities.
NN could seek the opinions of the NARS constituency in
determining future priorities. For example, printing the
NND yearly declassificjqk,tion priorities plan in Prologue and
inviting reader reaction to it could be one means of
increasing public comment and participation. Because of the.
Prologue publication schedule, however, this would have to
be done far in advance of the beginning of the year.It would
address the concerns oe) j rn t fi~~i t,~N,A,RS is insufficiently . t,
attuned to the M a s s` , t ch? rs and wqd d,' ~i So , `5 ~~ t
i s.. ,s11,
manner: th'a't ~,aS%. xF? p ~ ?, ~r 4
submit` det`1asi.'C,B,
Council 1for* c0 n'4 *'4
represents a,,,:.,
pad
resource ` whii=? :6
While researcher interest is ' e print y c nc n,
the only concern in establishing declassification priori-
ties. Other factors include arnticapated project. work a,n
? ._ T ~ f . i' y; . ' ? j .? . 1 ~ j ' ~ E. ! ? !'~ ~} 4 S A 1~ t :~~ ,i r)`1~t , ~ i l %~1 V
` ~ - is t{ ~t1 r, `..~.~ 1 (t;'~ 1tf. ~~.. ~; /'). 4,~ , ~ `i
' 3- '' r S ~ Lc' t ?r. tY~,lStk~tC ~~+t ~j~l~tt'iilt t ~ 1 ,rt"f tjU y
~ ..~ i. :_% 't~,~~.y ?.r~ t } i;.,,r{?r )1v ti~ti"F il;~'+t~irY~?t ,i~t~l~t~,~ ~ t~t,~,it ti~t~ t~f''~~1 ~.
A IN
i.~ rF? ~) ` U11 ~a .F ? tt~,fl I ~~` ? 1~+:5~'ar JY f,;. f ~~ n l'?i t v,t! ,:.!J}f ai rt.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R000100080006-4
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
a a
preservation. Either of, these elements can influence
declassification project choices or delay them. Project
work is a substantial investment and a questionable one if
declassification prospects are dim. Similarly, records may
have to be reviewed for declassification before proper
preservation treatment is practical. While not major
concerns, these are element, which should be evaluated
during the process of setting declassification priorities.
employees beer.hi ed, 'red o? .Op?F~. ~e , t
been the inabpil ty to ;ecruit rai nd hold employee
The turnover ` t `as kk' e y, +g ? K ~p.
Recommendation 3
NN should use readily available means to obtain constituent
consideration and comment on NARS established priorities.
NARS should not place itself in the position of establishing
its priorities in a vacuum. Other factors such as scheduled
project work and preservation should also be considered.
4. Personnel Turnover and Staffing Alternatives
One of the most significant problems that has plagued the
records declassification program since its inception has
have found other jobs while waiting for th~ir clearance.
uth4rizati,OS~C f#
rt.~: Y a ~Yr
The problem is both a matter of grade and career advancement
opportunity, and one of tedium and boredom of the review
work itself. NND was 'tie'ter sticGe'ssful in maintaining its-
staffing close to the authorized level due to the lead time
required to obtain security clearances and the high turn-
over. Any attempt to increase the overall declassification
'~ . I' ??~., ?~?i~. ~.~'~~ ., aY? r''t r i~'~.)~?a?1. ,:t`,1 tCY `~P{ ~r~~?i~~ r't ~, .i rrf .lj }+~ ,?i
up of full-time permanent employees. Other sources such as
train its own staff. Traditionally the staff has been made
must. :a'ls'o",be~,a~d eeS
i i
t'raditiotia ~e
.~ rkinr;ryhv'
4
, y
In it$ re,view
outset that sta f.b
at the expense ',bf`'':'the
r-?
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
tip }'S't" ?ry/'yf~uil~S{~} 4~~'~~-i'Zi~~ir+~lk/y7;~sY h~..t
?? ...i ^.~ f t, r !r +, 1 iii { '. ? ?r ?',t .1, ,1 l~..b ?Sl ~. } ,1~ .,.it 5>. erl
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
reemployed annuitants, or part-time or intermittent
appointments have not normally been used. Reemployed
annuitants are one personnel source that has the potential
for being of particular value to NND. If retired from
agencies whose records are under review by NND, these
employees could also provide expertise gained from their
years of experience. This arrangement has-already worked
well at State, CIA, and NSA. There are problems with the
annuitant approach, however. The first problem is that
there is little or no financial incentive. The second
problem is attracting the right people. Unless these people
have a great deal of leisure time and interest in the files
on which they would be working, there is little likelihood
that they would be interested in being reemployed. Also,
annuitants who spent their careers in the excepted service
are ineligible for competitive positions unless they are on
the OPM registers.
Therefore, annuitants may not be interested in working many
hours and may be difficult to recruit. Their potential
value, however, is sufficiently great that their employment
should be pursued to fulfill at least a small portion of the
h,istor.ica: ,dbitaetit'~y,`+ataF-~#I~btlr.Qc~t.
t'.'Y"!f .r.-x?. ,t... ?s..,...+r ;+~,,,.ta,- ..v ,. t. .. .4ti. ~ 52+5.~un1v,.',Nr.
supplement their, income, qr ? to o wpp ld, eq, oy, work; ng W i th
declassification program is that they would often be used on
tasks requiring a higher degree of skill and training than
is required in other parts of MARS. NARS would need to
recruit persons who are interested in a less than full-time
job over a period of years. dne s'uch'group might be
students. Another might be parents seeking to reenter the
job market while children are in school. Another might be
people retired from the private sector who would like to
3
A LM
i
used with succ 1,,, ~r ;
1 ,, f -;
records center,rr?oram': ?'f~,he=3e .,, ~,~
LIl GUU L I. L Vll, M.
1 f'ct r+?' ,i,'-,: -?-- .c r i, .. r? y.n V;v 1l6
N 2 r '~ da ~
.yI
?~k h
4
NND staffing ne.edaw.
~} tar~t~~~'t?b
ex.-NABS 'eiRtpY dye s{..,
Arinui tani~S" pa` -.t ?
out 'well as NND':',ei
work, NARS could experiment with them for a year. At the
t t
a' t a' ~ t ~ - d ?. `t , ~ ~ ~' 1~ i S}` ~ ?'~~ b~~ 1 f'Yq ~ , v ~ '
1i .) I t t?~ i~.t~r t'7.:}'I?t'f 12 f(~'r 1~t? }~J; 1 ;4i~"~,}~.{l' , (?r (f /4);.F~,,'.:
r
l
i' turnove g -
know how well the suggested staffing arrangements would
h' h r and h h at ` nc nt
` s t
! t>
}!U '/ :!!
r1 -A t1 '+t ?1 '. ~1P I.~l ? 1t) t'' { ~ti1 >t. ,,?)t' lktl W)".
*-' ' St?!T i' /I'3 ?t~ I )~t~.4~~t+'if+ ~tl,/+..17Z~.t2l~t .~.~,.;rr t~;`r
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R000100080006-4
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/01: CIA-RDP87-00181 R0001 00080006-4
end of that time NN could evaluate the results and determine
what employment method worked best, and similarly what
targeted groups of potential employees worked best. NND
could then further refine its staffing practices to achieve
the best mix.
By experimenting for a year, limited temporary appointments
could be used which would facilitate initial recruitment.
This would allow NND to try alternate staffing with a mini-
mum of time lost both to heavy paperwork requirements and
to waiting for Office of Personnel Management (OPM) action.
Another impediment in the hiring process is the clearance
requirement. At present Top Secret clearances cost $1,450
and take the Office of Personnel Management from three to
nine months to process. An expedited clearance costs $1,900
and should (but rarely does) take one to two months. Secret
clearances have no charge and take about one to two months.
The time lag from when a vancancy occurs to when it is
filled wi 1 a cleared person under current procedures ranges
from fiv ,:o eleven months. There is little that we can do
about th ')PM clearance lag. A possible alternate method of
bringing ?opt{gx}boar. yqu1d Q:. k,,4;n1y.aS.eare: