DRAFT REVISION OF DCID 1/19 - VOTE SHEET

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP87B01034R000500180039-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 29, 2005
• Sequence Number: 39
• Publication Date: April 27, 1982
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP87BO1034R000500180039-0
[27 APR 1982
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Security
Chief, Policy Branch, PPG
SUBJECT: Draft Revision of DCID 1/19 - Vote Sheet
REFERENCES: A. Memo for C/SECOM from C/Compartmentation SC,
dated 15 April 1982, Subject: Draft Revision
of DCID 1/19
B. Memo for Members SECOM from C/SECOM, dated
21 April 1982, same Subject, file SECOM-D-152
C. Memo for C/SECOM from D/OS, dated 5 February
1982, Subject: Draft Revision DCID 1/19, file
OS 2 0254
1. As indicated in Reference A, the Compartmentation Subcom-
mittee, SECOM, on 7 and 9 April 1982 reduced some 22 outstanding
issues to six basic issues concerning the new DCID 1/19 which have
been referred to the SECOM for resolution. Reference B furnishes
a "vote sheet" on these six issues. A resolution of each of these
issues will be attempted at the next SECOM meeting to be held on
19 May 1982 at 1000 hours in Room 4E-64 Headquarters.
2. Set out below are some observations for your consideration
in determining the Agency vote on each of the issues:
a. Definition of "Sensitive Compartmented
Information SCI
The existing DCID 1/19 of 6 June 1978, and
iterations of draft revisions defined "SCI" with
the use of the term "compartmentation." By
Reference C you suggested an alternative defini-
tion which was incorporated in the draft DCID 1/19
submitted by Reference A. The Navy demurrer side-
steps a longstanding issue of ultimate authority
over Navy special compartmented operational
programs. It should not mar a definition of SCI
that defines the term. It is suggested that the
definition of SCI be changed as drafted.
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP87BO1034R000500180039-0
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP87B01034R000500180039-0
b. The Non-disclosure Agreement (NdA) "retro-fit"
requirement.
On 2 October 1981 you decided against a
"retrofit" by CIA since gency staff
emp are covered by the Snepp decision and
som contractor employees as well as 2,000
non- customers, many of whom are Cabinet-level
officers or Presidential appointees, would place a
heavy administrative burden on SSC. The DCI,
moreover, in an earlier memorandum of 28 September
1981 to the National Foreign Intelligence Board
(NFIB) on the subject of NdA's, stated that Form
4193 "may" be used by the Community to satisfy the
requirement for a NdA for SCI access. Senior
Intelligence Officers were "encouraged" to include
a prepublication review requirement in any alter-
native form of NdA used. The only thing mandated
by the DCI was that they "should use the same form
for all SCI accesses they grant." The DCI did not
mandate a "retrofit." The penultimate sentence of
Paragraph 5 on page 3 of Reference A should be
amended by substituting the word "encouraged" for
"mandatory." As it stands, the Compartmentation
Subcommittee has exceeded its authority in mandat-
ing the use of a "prepublication review provision"
which in effect mandates a "retrofit." The use of
the term "encouraged" for "mandatory" permits pro-
spective implementation which is what DoD intends
doing. Mr. Maynard Anderson stated at the last
SECOM Meeting that DoD would "retrofit" on an
"opportunity basis."
c. "Proximity" access.
The Agency position at the Compartmentation SC
level has been that either the DCID 1/19 or the NSA
amendments are acceptable. The NSA concern is to
protect the NSA Secure Telephone System by specifying
the need for SI access rather than PROXIMITY to use
this Secure Telephone System. It is suggested that
the language of the draft DCID 1/19 be adopted.
NSA's concern should be handled by NSA in a different
arena.
d. Basic SCI Accountability Requirements.
As a minimum the CIA member to the Compartmenta-
tion SC has held to accountability for the life of
an SCI-controlled document plus six months. The
present lack of accountability has frustrated any
reasonable attempt to pursue document trails during
2
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP87B01034R000500180039-0
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP87BO1034R000500180039-0
investigations into unauthorized disclosures of
SCI. As written, the wording is window-dressing for
what in effect is no system of accountability. The
DoD pleads an inability to comply because of exces-
sive administrative costs. In lieu of the Agency's
positon, it is suggested that Paragraph 29a.(1) on
page 13 of Reference A be amended by deleting in the
first sentence the words "for at least 6 months after
the receipt of the material" and substituting the
words "to assure that appropriate support can be
given any investigative effort into establishing
whether an SCI document has been the subject of
unauthorized disclosure." Admittedly, this will not
assure a system of accountability, but it will place
on the SOIC the responsibility for accounting for SCI
documents under his control in some manner to assure
that their contents have not been disclosed to
unauthorized persons.
e. Legislative Branch Access.
NSA is the only Agency having "undefined"
difficulty with this issue. Paragraphs 37-41
of Reference A codify extant procedures into a
statement of policy. Paragraph 37d provides for
the resolution of special issues. It is suggested
that the language proposed in DCID 1/19 be adopted.
Further, demurrer by NSA is not foreclosed, but NSA
must then bear the burden of such action.
f. Use of the terms "SOIC" and "SIO".
NSA is the only Agency having difficulty with
these terms. The terms "SOIC" and "SIO" are
defined in Paragraphs 1g and h of Reference A. It
is suggested that these definitions and use in the
draft DCID 1/19 be accepted. As a fallback the
definition of SIO in Paragraph 1g could be dropped.
Paragraph 20 on page 8 should then be amended by
deleting the words "by their SIO's" at the end of
the fifth sentence and substituting the words "to
them." Similarly, in Paragraph 49 on page 22, the
first sentence, delete the words "and SIG's."
CC: C/SSC/OS
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP87BO1034R000500180039-0