Though it is still too early to identify concrete results, the pace of Congressional oversight activity on secrecy and intelligence matters has already increased markedly in the new Congress.

The House Intelligence Subcommittee on Intelligence Community Management said it “will monitor trends in classification of executive branch material, the costs of over-classification, the practice of selective declassification, and the exclusive reliance on a variety of ‘sensitive but unclassified’ designations by U.S. government agencies and departments,” according to a new Committee work plan (pdf). “The Subcommittee will also examine the issue of unauthorized disclosure of classified information.” See “Oversight Plan for the 110th Congress,” House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, February 7.

Rep. Henry Waxman’s House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a February 13 hearing on the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act that would extend protections to whistleblowers in intelligence and national security agencies. Prepared testimony from that hearing, including several informative statements on current issues in whistleblower protection policy, may be found here.

Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) introduced the Intelligence Community Audit Act (H.R. 978), a bill that would “reaffirm the authority of the [Government Accountability Office] to audit and evaluate the programs, activities, and financial transactions of the intelligence community.” It is a companion measure to S. 82, introduced by Sen. Akaka last month.

Senator Christopher Dodd introduced the Restoring the Constitution Act (S. 576) that would amend the much-criticized Military Commissions Act of 2006, which curtailed habeas corpus claims by suspected enemy combatants. Co-sponsor Sen. Russ Feingold said the new bill would “restore basic due process rights and ensure that no person is subject to indefinite detention without charge based on the sole discretion of the President.”

Military doctrine on maintaining air superiority against enemy aircraft and missiles is presented in a newly updated publication (pdf) from the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Counterair operations include both offensive counterair (OCA) to destroy enemy aircraft, missiles or other weapons before they can be used, and defensive counterair (DCA) to detect, intercept and destroy enemy weapons in use.

Military planners “should expect MANPADS [shoulder-fired missiles] and AAA [anti-aircraft artillery] coverage wherever enemy forces are encountered,” the new doctrine states.

Seven U.S. helicopters have been shot down in Iraq in the last month, the Associated Press noted today.

See “Countering Air and Missile Threats,” Joint Publication JP 3-01, February 5, 2007.

The Department of Defense has revised and supplemented its polygraph program to include non-polygraph techniques for detecting deception.

A new Pentagon directive (pdf) introduces the term “Credibility Assessment (CA),” which refers to “The multi-disciplinary field of existing as well as potential techniques and procedures to assess truthfulness that relies on physiological reactions and behavioral measures to test the agreement between an individual’s memories and statements.”

The new directive also transfers the polygraph program from the Defense Security Service to the secretive DoD Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA). The program will be overseen by the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence.

Eleven military and defense intelligence organizations listed in the directive are authorized to conduct polygraph and credibility assessment examinations.

The reliability of polygraph testing for employee screening is widely disputed on scientific grounds. But many government security officials nevertheless insist on its value and utility, and the practice persists.

See “Polygraph and Credibility Assessment Program,” Department of Defense Directive 5210.48, January 25, 2007.

Improvised explosive devices (IEDs) are a major source of U.S. and allied casualties in Iraq. Military doctrine for confronting and defeating the IED threat is set forth in a 2005 U.S. Army field manual (excerpt, pdf).

“The proliferation of IEDs on the battlefield in both Iraq and Afghanistan has posed the most pervasive threat facing coalition forces in those theaters,” the manual states. “The persistent effectiveness of this threat has influenced unit operations, U.S. policy, and public perception.”

The manual discusses the nature of the threat, describes the defining characteristics of IEDs, and presents a framework for developing opposing strategy and tactics.

The manual has not been approved for public release and portions of the document that may be operationally sensitive are being withheld from publication online by Secrecy News.

See “Improvised Explosive Device Defeat (excerpt),” Field Manual Interim FMI 3-34.119, September 2005 (44 pages of a total 142 pages).

The 2005 document makes no mention of the explosively formed projectiles (EFPs) that have recently been described by the Department of Defense as a particularly dangerous variant of IED. See a February 11, 2007 DoD briefing on “Iranian Support for Lethal Activity in Iraq,” via TPM Muckraker.

The transfer of sensitive government communications security (COMSEC) information and equipment to industry is the subject of a newly revised U.S. Navy Instruction (pdf).

“Government cryptographic equipment operations will ordinarily be conducted by the Government,” the Instruction states.

“However, when there is a valid need and it is clearly in the best interest of the Navy and the Government, cryptographic equipment, keying material, related COMSEC information, and access to classified U.S. Government traffic may be provided to U.S. contractors….”

See “Release of Communications Security (COMSEC) Material To U.S. Industrial Firms Under Contract to the U.S. Navy,” OPNAVINST 2221.5C, February 7, 2007.

The decline of arms control as an instrument of policy in the Bush Administration is charted in a new report (pdf) from the Congressional Research Service, which surveys the evolution of the field over the last several decades.

“The Bush Administration has altered the role of arms control in U.S. national security policy,” the CRS report states.

“The President and many in his Administration question the degree to which arms control negotiations and formal treaties can enhance U.S. security objectives.”

“Instead, the Administration would prefer, when necessary, that the United States take unilateral military action or join in ad hoc coalitions to stem the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.”

“The absence of confidence in arms control has extended to the State Department, where the Bush Administration has removed the phrase ‘arms control’ from all bureaus that were responsible for this policy area.”

See “Arms Control and Nonproliferation: A Catalog of Treaties and Agreements,” January 29, 2007.

The 2007 intelligence authorization bill was approved without amendment on February 8 by the Senate Armed Services Committee with a recommendation that it be passed into law.

The Senate bill would notably require public disclosure of the annual intelligence budget total, an objective long sought by open government advocates and classification reformers. Although there is no credible national security rationale for withholding the amount of the intelligence budget, it remains formally classified.

The Committee issued a brief report on the pending intelligence bill.

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence held a closed hearing February 8 on Saudi Arabia and the reputed role of some Saudis in financing terrorist activities.

The hearing was held at the request of SSCI member Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) who described his perspective on the subject in a rather blunt statement on the Senate floor.

“It is time to bring to light the way in which Saudi oil money is fueling the fires of terrorism so people can actually see who is getting burned and what is necessary to protect the security and the well-being of Americans in a perilous world,” he said.

A new compilation (large pdf) of official records, news releases and other documentation provides a fairly comprehensive account of the Sea-Based X-Band Radar (SBX), an ambitious missile defense program intended to track warheads in flight and to cue ground-based interceptor missiles.

The SBX, constructed aboard a modified semi-submersible oil platform, departed Hawaii last month and arrived this week in the waters near Alaska’s Aleutian Island chain, according to a February 7 release from the Missile Defense Agency.

Hundreds of pages of background material on the program were assembled by independent researcher Allen Thomson.

“The SBX story has been an interesting one, in my opinion, and I think it might become even more interesting when the history of NMD/GMD is written,” Mr. Thomson told Secrecy News. “Right now, I’m waiting to see if the second CS-50 platform nearing completion at Severodvinsk is going to be bought by Boeing for SBX-2.”

See “Sea-Based X-Band Radar (SBX) Sourcebook” by Allen Thomson (19 MB PDF).

Related background is also available from the Congressional Research Service in “Sea-Based Ballistic Missile Defense — Background and Issues for Congress” (pdf), updated December 19, 2006.

Noteworthy new publications from the U.S. Army on military doctrine and regulation include these (all pdf).

“Intelligence Support to Capability Development,” Army Regulation AR 381-11, 26 January 2007.

“Army Field Support Brigade Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures,” Field Manual Interim FMI 4-93.41, February 2007.

“Mortuary Affairs Operations,” Field Manual FM 4-20.64, January 2007.

Recent reports of the Congressional Research Service that are not readily available in the public domain include the following (all pdf).

“Navy Aegis Cruiser and Destroyer Modernization: Background and Issues for Congress,” February 1, 2007.

“FY2008 Appropriations for State and Local Homeland Security,” February 5, 2007.

“Military Airlift: C-17 Aircraft Program,” updated January 25, 2007.

The interagency Nuclear Weapons Council (NWC) has formally decided to endorse the proposed Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) concept as the basis of the future U.S. nuclear arsenal, a new report (pdf) from the Congressional Research Service revealed today.

In November 2006, “the NWC determined that the RRW is to be adopted as the strategy for maintaining a long term safe, secure and reliable nuclear deterrent,” the CRS report stated, quoting from new Department of Energy budget documents released this week (at page CRS-26).

It is a momentous decision on which Congress might be expected to weigh in.

Not only that, but RRW development will be funded at the expense of existing nuclear weapons programs, budget documents say, “through reductions in resources required to support legacy weapons” (at page CRS-27).

Defunding work to extend the functional lifetime of existing weapons would tend to foreclose efforts to avoid new nuclear weapons development.

According to a CRS calculation (and subject to future adjustments), the projected budget for the RRW program from FY 2008-2012 would be $725.1 million, including NNSA and Navy funds.

The Congressional Research Service does not release its publications directly to the public. A copy of the new report was obtained by Secrecy News and posted on the Federation of American Scientists web site.

See “Nuclear Weapons: The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program,” updated February 8, 2007.

Some more noteworthy new reports from the Congressional Research Service that are not readily available in the public domain include these (all pdf).

“Freedom of Information Act Amendments: 110th Congress,” updated February 1, 2007.

“Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy and Implementation,” updated January 8, 2007.

“Earthquakes: Risk, Monitoring, Notification, and Research,” February 2, 2007.