New Guidelines Define NCTC Access to Non-Terror Databases
The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), a component of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, may obtain access to federal databases containing non-terrorism-related information in order to acquire information needed for authorized counterterrorism purposes, pursuant to a recent memorandum of agreement (pdf) between the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General.
“NCTC will access information in such datasets identified as containing non-terrorism information… only to determine if the dataset [also] contains terrorism information,” the memorandum states.
“NCTC is not otherwise permitted under these guidelines to query, use, or exploit such datasets (e.g., analysts may not ‘browse’ through records in the dataset that do not match a query with terrorism datapoints, or conduct ‘pattern-based’ queries or analyses without terrorism datapoints),” the memo directs.
The seven-page Memorandum of Agreement has not been approved for public release, but a copy was obtained by Secrecy News. It took effect on November 4, 2008.
“Most of the terrorists arrested in the U.S. have supported themselves with common criminal activities” and therefore NCTC would have a legitimate need for access to related law enforcement information, a senior intelligence official from another agency told Secrecy News.
The new memo “regularizes the process by which NCTC can access information not originally collected for intelligence purposes,” the official said. It also “inserts the ODNI Civil Liberties Protection Officer into the process with an affirmative role for the first time — I think.”
The memorandum makes the ODNI Civil Liberties Protection Officer responsible for ensuring that NCTC complies with privacy guidelines when accessing non-terrorism-related databases.
This report serves as a landscape assessment and toolbox from which local governments can negotiate an informed position when it comes to the levers available to them and includes a first-of-its kind analysis of eight executed community benefits agreements.
When a hurricane hits, it’s all hands on deck – that goes for federal data, too. Pulling back from our investments in timely, accurate, and accessible public data will only make us less prepared and put us all at greater risk.
This is bigger than a singular elimination of race and ethnicity questions. It could accelerate the second wave of widespread reductions to demographic data, leaving public health officials with even less information to deliver better health outcomes for all Americans.
Soft law was never meant to be a permanent solution. Treating it as one, and letting the sandcastle stand in for the skyscraper indefinitely, is how we end up with a decade of voluntary commitments and no enforceable accountability to show for it.