essured, coerced, or influenced by interests imical to the United States, or that hostile telligence is taking action specifically dicted against that person. Specific policy idance on the applicability of these proceres and the jurisdictional considerations e stated in § 154.9.

5. Case Opening

. A request for investigation must be subtted by using DD Form 1879 and accomnied by supporting documentation unless ch documentation is not immediately ailable, or the obtaining of documentation uld compromise a sensitive investigation. on receipt of the request, the military instigative component will identify the ue(s), scope the leads, and ensure that the oposed action is that which is authorized

DIS as delineated in this part, 32 CFR rt 361 and Defense Investigative Service nual 201-1.

1. Upon such determination, the Compoat will prepare an Action Lead Sheet LS) which fully identifies the Subject and scope of the case, and specifies precisely leads which each investigative compoat (including DIS/PIC when appropriate) is conduct.

Case opening procedures described above identical for LAA and post-adjudication ses except with respect to notification of se opening to PIC:

1) Post-adjudication Cases. These cases, cause they involve an issue, are potenlly sensitive and must be examined as rly as possible by PIC for conformity to a latest DoD policy. Accordingly, the ininotification to PIC of case openings will ways be by message. The message will conin at a minimum:

ja) Full identification of the subject;

b) A narrative describing the allegation/ cts in sufficient detail to support opening the case; and

e) A brief listing of the leads that are anned.

The DD Form 1879 and supporting docuents, along with the agency's ALS, should subsequently mailed to PIC.

(2) LAA Cases. The notification to PIC of se opening will normally be accomplished mailing the DD Form 1879, DD Form 398 'ersonal History Statement), a copy of the LS, and any other supporting documents to [C. Message notification to PIC in LAA ises will only be required if there is a secuty or suitability issue apparent in the DD orm 1879 or supporting documents.

(d) Beyond initial actions necessary to test llegation for investigative merit and jurisiction. no further investigative action hould commence until the notification of ase opening to PIC has been dispatched.

(e) PIC will promptly respond to the notifiation of case opening by mail or message pecifying any qualifying remarks along

with a summary of previously existing data. PIC will also provide a DIS case control number (CCN). This number must be used by all components on all case related paperwork/reports.

(The investigating agency may assign its unique service CCN for interim internal control; however, the case will be processed, referenced, and entered into the DCII by the DIS case control number.) The first five digits of the DIS CCN will be the Julian date of the case opening when received at DIS.

6. Case Processing

a. The expected completion time for leads in LAA cases is 50 calendar days and for post-adjudication cases, 30 days, as computed from the date of receipt of the request. If conditions preclude completion in this time period, a pending report of the results to date, along with an estimated date of completion will be submitted to PIC.

b. Copies of all ALSS will be furnished to PIC. In addition, PIC will be promptly notified of any significant change in the scope of the case, or the development of an investigative issue.

c. The procedures for implementing the Privacy Act in PSI cases are set in DIS Manual 20-1-M 1. Any other restrictions on the release of information imposed by an overseas source or by regulations of the country where the inquiry takes place will be clearly stated in the report.

d. The report format for these cases will be that used by the military investigative agency.

e. Investigative action outside the jurisdictional area of an investigative component office may be directed elsewhere by ALS as needed in accordance with that agency's procedures and within the following geographical considerations:

(1) Leads will be sent to PIC if the investigative action is in the United States, District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Bahama Islands, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the following islands in the Pacific: Wake, Midway, Kwajalin, Johnston, Carolines, Marshalls, and Eniwetok.

(2) Leads to areas not listed above may be dispatched to other units of the investigative agency or even to another military agency's field units if there is an agreement or memorandum of understanding that provides for such action. For case accountability purposes, copies of such "lateral" leads must be sent to the PIC.

(3) Leads that cannot be dispatched as described in paragraph (2) above, and those that must be sent to a non-DoD investigative agency should be sent to PIC for disposition.

f. The Defense Investigative Manual calls for obtaining PIC approval before conducting a Subject interview on a post-adjudicative investigation. To avoid the delay that compliance with this procedure would create, a

military investigative component may conduct the interview provided:

(1) All other investigative leads have been completed and reviewed.

(2) The CCN has been received, signifying DIS concurrence with the appropriateness of the investigation.

(3) Contrary instructions have not been received from the PIC.

(4) The interview is limited to the resolution of the relevant issues disclosed by the investigation.

g. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraphs f.(1) through (4) of this Appendix, if time is of the essence due to imminent transfer of the subject, a subject interview may be conducted at the discretion of the investigative agency.

7. Case Responsibility LAA and PA Paragraph 3, above, describes the advantages of timely handling which accrue when the military investigative components act for DIS overseas. These actions for DIS may, however, be limited by the component's staffing and resource limitations, especially since some cases require more administration and management than others. Post-adjudication case leads, for instance, will normally be within the geographical jurisdiction of the component that accepted the request for investigation; therefore, relatively little case management is required. In contrast, LAA cases may require leads worldwide, and, therefore, create more complex case management and administration, especially in the tracking, monitoring and reviewing of leads outside the component's geographical area. Accordingly, an investigative component will accept the case from the requester, but only assign itself the appropriate leads within its own geographical jurisdiction and send the balance to PIC for appropriate disposition in accordance with the following:

a. The investigative agency will accept the request for investigation (thereby saving time otherwise lost in mailing to PIC) but limit its involvement in case management by extracting only those leads it will conduct or manage locally.

b. The agency should then prepare an ALS that shows clearly what leads it will cover and send PIC a copy of this ALS, along with the request for investigation and any other appropriate documentation. It must be clear in the ALS that PIC is to act on all those leads that the unit has not assigned to itself. c. PIC, as case manager, will assume responsibility for the complete investigative package and, upon receipt of the last lead, will send the results to the appropriate activity.

d. The agency that accepted the case and assigned itself leads may send a copy of its report to the activity in the "Results to" block at the same time it sends the originals

to PIC. If so, the letter of transmittal must inform the recipient that these reports are only a portion of the investigation, and that the balance will be forthcoming from PIC. Similarly, PIC must be informed of which investigative reports were disseminated. (This is normally done by sending PIC a copy of the letter of transmittal.)

8. Scope

a. LAA. The scope of investigation is 10 years or from age 18, whichever is the shortest period.

b. Post-Adjudication Cases. There is no standard scope. The inquiries conducted will be limited to those necessary to resolve the issue(s).

9. Case Closing: LAA and PA

a. Whether the investigative component or PIC closes out an investigation, there are three key elements to consider:

(1) The investigative results must be reviewed for quality and conformance to policy.

(2) The results must be sent to the activity listed in the "Results to" block of the DD Form 1879.

(3) PIC must be informed whether or not any dissemination was made by the inves tigative agency and, if so, what reports were furnished.

b. Investigative results may also be sent to a requester or higher level activity that makes a statement of need for the results. It such instances, a copy of the letter requesting the results and the corresponding letter of transmittal must be sent to PIC for retention.

c. When an investigative agency disseminates reports for PIC, it may use the transmittal documents, letters, or cover sheets it customarily uses for its own cases.

d. The material that is to be provided to PIC will consist of: The originals of all reports, and all other case documentation such as original statements, confidential source sheets, interview logs. requests for investigation, letters of transmittal to adjudicaters requesters, or communications with the requester, such as those that modify the scope of the investigation.

e. For DIS to fulfill its responsibilities under DoD 5220.22-R and the Privacy Act of 1974 all inquiries conducted in its behalf must be set forth in an ROI for the permanent file, whether the case is completed. terminated early, or referred to another agency

10. Referral

A case may require premature closing at any time after receipt of the DD Form 1879 by the investigative component if the information accompanying the request, or that which is later developed, is outside DIS jurisdiction. For example, alleged violations of

v, a counterintelligence matter, or actual =rcion/influence in a hostage situation (see agraph 4.b. of this Appendix ) must be rered to the appropriate agency, and DIS invement terminated. The requester will be ormed by letter or indorsement to the DD m 1879 of the information developed that, = to jurisdictional consideration, the case referred to (fill in appropriate address) I that the DIS case is closed. The agency which referral was made and PIC will be nished with the results of all investigans conducted under DIS auspices. DIS, vever, has an interest in the referral agens actions and no information should be soted from that agency.

'PENDIX J TO PART 154-ADP POSITION CATEGORIES AND CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATING POSITIONS

MB Circular A-71 (and Transmittal Memo 1), July 1978 OMB Circular A-130, Decem12, 1985, and FPM Letter 732, November 1978 contain the criteria for designating itions under the existing categories used the personnel security program for FedA civilian employees as well as the criia for designating ADP and ADP related sitions. This policy is outlined below:

ADP Position Categories

1. Critical-Sensitive Positions

ADP-I positions. Those positions in which e incumbent is responsible for the plan1g. direction, and implementation of a mputer security program; major responsility for the direction, planning and design a computer system, including the hardare and software; or, can access a system ring the operation or maintenance in such way, and with a relatively high risk for using grave damage, or realize a signifint personal gain.

2. Noncritical-Sensitive Positions

ADP-II positions. Those positions in which le incumbent is responsible for the direcon, planning, design, operation, or mainteance of a computer system, and whose work technically reviewed by a higher authority (the ADP-I category to insure the integty of the system.

3. Nonsensitive Positions ADP-III positions. All other positions inolved in computer activities.

In establishing the categories of positions, ther factors may enter into the determinaion, permitting placement in higher or ower categories based on the agency's judgement as to the unique characteristics of the system or the safeguards protecting the sys

em.

Criteria for Designating Positions

Three categories have been established for designating computer and computer-related positions-ADP-I, ADP-II, and ADP-III. Specific criteria for assigning positions to one of these categories is as follows:

Category

ADP-I

ADP-II

ADP-III

PART

Criteria

Responsibility or the development and administration of agency computer security programs, and also including direction and control of risk analysis and/or threat as

sessment.

Significant involvement in life-critical or mission-critical systems.

Significant involvement in life-critical or mission-critical systems.

Responsibility for the preparation or approval of data for input into a system which does not necessarily involve personal access to the system, but with relatively high risk for effecting grave damage or realizing significant personal gain.

Relatively high risk assignments associated with or directly involving the accounting, disbursement, or authorization for disbursement from systems of (1) dollar amounts of $10 million per year or greater, or (2) lesser amounts if the activities of the individual are not subject to technical review by higher authority in the ADP-I category to ensure the integrity of the system.

Positions involving major responsibility for the direction planning, design, testing, maintenance, operation, monitoring, and/or management of systems hardware and soft

ware.

Other positions as designated by the agency head that involve relatively high risk for effecting grave damage or realizing significant personal gain.

Responsibility for systems design, operation, testing, maintenance, and/or monitoring that is carried out under technical review of higher authority in the ADP-I category, includes, but is not limited to:

(1) access to and/or processing of proprietary data, information requiring protection under the Privacy Act of 1974, and Governmentdeveloped privileged information involving the award of contracts;

(2) accounting, disbursement, or authorization for disbursement from systems of dollar amounts less than $10 million per year. Other positions are designated by the agency head that involve a degree of access to a system that creates a significant potential for damage or personal gain less than that in ADP-I positions.

All other positions involved in Federal computer activities.

155-DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL
SECURITY CLEAR-

PERSONNEL SECURITY
ANCE PROGRAM

Sec.

155.1 Purpose.

155.2 Applicability and scope. 155.3 Definitions.

190-116 D-00--23

(a) Applies to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Military Departments, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Staff, the Inspector General of the Department of Defense (IG, DoD), and the Defense Agencies (hereafter referred to collectively as "the DoD Components").

(b) By mutual agreement, also extends to other Federal Agencies that include:

(1) Department of Agriculture. (2) Department of Commerce.

(3) Department of Interior.

(4) Department of Justice.

(5) Department of Labor.

(6) Department of State.

(7) Department of Transportation.

(8) Department of Treasury.

(9) Environmental Protection Agency.

(10) Federal Emergency Management Agency.

(11) Federal Reserve System.

(12) General Accounting Office.

(13) General Services Administration.

(14) National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

(15) National Science Foundation. (16) Small Business Administration. (17) United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency.

(18) United States Information Agency. (19) United States International Trade Commission.

(20) United States Trade Representative.

(c) Applies to cases that the Defense Industrial Security Clearance Office

(e) Does not apply to cases in which: (1) A security clearance is withdrawn because the applicant no longer has a need for access to classified information;

(2) An interim security clearance is withdrawn by the DISCO during an investigation; or

(3) A security clearance is withdrawn for administrative reasons that are without prejudice as to a later determination of whether the grant or continuance of the applicant's security clearance would be clearly consistent with the national interest.

(f) Does not apply to cases for access to sensitive compartmented information or a special access program.

[57 FR 5383, Feb. 14, 1992, as amended at 59 FR 35464, July 12, 1994]

§ 155.3 Definitions.

(a) Applicant. Any U.S. citizen who holds or requires a security clearance or any immigrant alien who holds or requires a limited access authorization for access to classified information needed in connection with his or her employment in the private sector; any U.S. citizen who is a direct-hire employee or selectee for a position with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and who holds or requires NATO certificates of security clearance or security assurances for access to U.S. or foreign classified information; or any U.S. citizen nominated by the Red Cross or United Service Organizations for assignment with the Military Services overseas. The term "applicant' does not apply to those U.S. citizens who are seconded to NATO by U.S. Departments and Agencies or to U.S. citizens recruited through such Agencies in response to a request from NATO.

3

(b) Clearance Decision. A decision made in accordance with this part concerning whether it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant an applicant a security clearance for access to Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret information. A favorable clearance decision establishes eligibility of the applicant to be granted a security clearance for access at the level governed by the documented need for such access, and the type of investigation specified for that level in 32 CFR part 154. An unfavorable clearance decision denies any application for a security clearance and revokes any existing security clearance, thereby preventing access to classified information at any level and the retention of any existing security clearance.

$155.4 Policy.

It is DoD policy that:

(a) All proceedings provided for by [ this part shall be conducted in a fair and impartial manner.

(b) A clearance decision reflects the basis for an ultimate finding as to whether it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant or continue a security clearance for the applicant.

(c) Except as otherwise provided for by E.O. 10865, as amended, or this part, a final unfavorable clearance decision shall not be made without first providing the applicant with:

(1) Notice of specific reasons for the proposed action.

(2) An opportunity to respond to the

reasons.

(3) Notice of the right to a hearing and the opportunity to cross-examine persons providing information adverse to the applicant.

(4) Opportunity to present evidence on his or her own behalf, or to be represented by counsel or personal representative.

(5) Written notice of final clearance decisions.

(6) Notice of appeal procedures.

(d) Actions pursuant to this part shall cease upon termination of the applicant's need for access to classified information except in those cases in which:

(1) A hearing has commenced;

(2) A clearance decision has been issued; or

(3) The applicant's security clearance was suspended and the applicant provided a written request that the case continue.

[57 FR 5383, Feb. 14, 1992, as amended at 59 FR 48565, Sept. 22, 1994]

$155.5 Responsibilities.

(a) The Assistant Secretary of Defense of Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence shall:

oversee

(1) Establish investigative policy and adjudicative standards and their application.

(2) Coordinate with the General Counsel of the Department of Defense (GC, DoD) on policy affecting clearance decisions.

(3) Issue clarifying guidance and instructions as needed.

(b) The General Counsel of the Department of Defense shall:

(1) Establish guidance and provide oversight as to legal sufficiency of procedures and standards established by this part.

(2) Establish the organization and composition of the DOHA.

(3) Designate a civilian attorney to be the Director, DOHA.

(4) Issue clarifying guidance and instructions as needed.

(5) Administer the program established by this part.

(6) Issue invitational travel orders in appropriate cases to persons to appear and testify who have provided oral or written statements adverse to the applicant relating to a controverted issue.

(7) Designate attorneys to be Department Counsels assigned to the DOHA to represent the Government's interest in cases and related matters within the applicability and scope of this part.

(8) Designate attorneys to be Administrative Judges assigned to the DOHA.

(9) Designate attorneys to be Administrative Judge members of the DOHA Appeal Board.

(10) Provide for supervision of attorneys and other personnel assigned or attached to the DOHA.

(11) Develop and implement policy established or coordinated with the GC, DoD, in accordance with this part.