Talk:Security clearance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

Contents 1 Clearance versus Access 2 DOE versus DoD and DHS Clearance 3 Karl Rove 4 us centric 5 Al Bundy? Uri Geller? 6 UK clearance names 7 References

[edit] Clearance versus Access

SCI is an access, not a clearance level. Top Secret is the clearance level and access to SCI is granted to those who require access to the information. This is explained in Classified information in the United States. I propose changing the article to reflect this key detail.

[edit] DOE versus DoD and DHS Clearance

The US part of this article seems to focus on Department of Defense (DoD) language and process, which do not fit Department of Energy (DOE). I am not sure if DOE is the only exceptional department. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) uses the DoD language AND process completely. If anyone can find it, I would like to see more specific information on DOE's L and Q clearance, as well as the translations that are possible. Here is what I am seeing:

- It seems a DOE Q clearance is not automatically considered a TS SCI-Q (nuclear).
- I am not sure if a DOE Q involves a polygraph, but suspect it does not.
- It is suspected a DOE Q can convert to a TS SCI-Q, but that DOE may not accept the converse.
- It also seems logical that TS without an SCI or any type cannot be upgraded to a DOE Q.

 Some of this may be a matter of inequivalences, administrative confusion, or simply how well the spirit of cost savings has made it to DOE.

 I will look here for any responses as to how this information can be covered more completely.

I noticed where it says:

"The security clearance forms are available at http://www.gsa.gov/Portal/gsa/ep/formslibrary.do by searching for SF86 and SF85."

FYI, the SF85 is not a security clearance.

[edit] Karl Rove

User:Brownman40 removed Karl Rove's name from the list of "Individuals who have had security clearances revoked or challenged" (and also deleted "or challenged" from the heading), saying "Some people called Al Gore's security clearance into question. Let's not turn this into a POV war."

I just did a Google News search on "security clearance" and Karl Rove is mentioned in 7 of the top 10 hits. I've been following US politics for quite some time and I don't recall anyone questioning Al Gore's clearance or any claim that he leaked classified information. A Google search on "Al Gore security clearance" turned up no such story either. Ignoring the Karl Rove clearance controversy in the article about security clearance seems POV to me. --agr 10:24, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] us centric

We now have headings specifying the US and UK clearances. The english speaking world has more (.au comes to mind), but I don't think the article is intentionally us-focused. I am therefore removing the tag from the article. kthx. 208.29.145.75 23:00, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Al Bundy? Uri Geller?

What's with the weird names for UK clearance levels?

[edit] UK clearance names

What's weird about them? I should be able to explain if you tell me what you find odd. Jas 22:22, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

I started cleaning up the references. I noticed some of the websites are not working well which does not help with the credibility. The templates are pretty straightforward and I have tried to make them easy to read within the article. All constructive criticism welcome. --BlindEagle^{talk~contribs} 14:30, 21 September 2007 (UTC)