Proposed Order Would Deny Clearance With No Appeal

The Bush Administration is weighing a proposed presidential order that would allow security officers to deny clearances--and thus jobs--to applicants for federal and defense industry posts without stating a reason or giving them a right to respond.

The proposed order would eliminate a series of rights accorded government and defense workers and job applicants for 29 years.

A copy of the proposed order was obtained Thursday night by the Associated Press.

David Holliday, spokesman for the Senate Intelligence Committee, said staff employees had reviewed the draft and told Administration representatives in December that at the staff level “we might have trouble with sections in the due process area.”

Details of Order

The 21-page document was circulated for comment to 30 federal agencies on Jan. 24. It would authorize security officers to determine whether a worker or applicant “has exploitable vulnerabilities or has engaged in any exploitable conduct or indiscreet behavior,” including “criminal or dishonest activity, alcohol or substance abuse, or exploitable sexual conduct.”

“Under this order, it’s quite conceivable that someone like John Tower could not get a security clearance for a Pentagon job, because he would have no right to learn about, much less respond to, the allegations of alcohol abuse and womanizing that have been made against him,” said Allan Adler of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Tower, President Bush’s nominee to be defense secretary, has been able to respond to the allegations because they have come during his confirmation hearings before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Under the proposed order, if Tower were a new applicant for a Pentagon job requiring a clearance, any such allegations uncovered in a normal unpublicized background check would not have to be relayed to him.

Adler said the document “is offering up a senseless deprivation of individual rights as a substitute for sensible security reforms.”

Rep. Don Edwards (D-San Jose), chairman of the House civil and constitutional rights subcommittee, wrote Bush on Thursday urging him not to sign the order.

“This means that a person denied a clearance on the basis of erroneous information would never be told what the information was and would never have an opportunity to correct it,” Edwards wrote. “I do not see how this serves the national security.”

The order would replace one issued by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1960 that guaranteed any worker in private industry whose security clearance was denied or revoked:

--A written statement of the reasons for the action.

--An opportunity to reply in writing.

--The right to appear personally with a lawyer before the head of the agency to contest the decision.

--The right to cross-examine either orally or in writing those who made statements against him.

--A written statement of the final decision on each allegation.

Defense Department regulations have accorded similar rights to the Pentagon’s civilian and military workers.

The proposed order would guarantee none of those rights to a job applicant denied an initial clearance or to a current worker denied a higher clearance.

For current workers whose clearance was revoked, the proposed Bush order would guarantee only:

--A written explanation of the reasons.

--An opportunity to respond in writing and request a review of the revocation.

--Written notice of the results of the review.

--An opportunity to appeal in writing to a higher official, whose decision would be final.

Even these rights could be denied entirely to employees whose clearances were revoked by an agency head who determines “such procedures would not be consistent with the national security interests of the United States,” the order said.