FAS

A Focus on “Sensitive But Unclassified” Information

03.15.06 | 2 min read | Text by Steven Aftergood

The government’s use of the problematic “sensitive but unclassified” (SBU) designation to restrict access to information that does not warrant classification is coming under new scrutiny.

“Federal agencies do not use uniform definitions of SBU information or have consistent policies for safeguarding or releasing it,” a new study from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) observed.

“This lack of uniformity and consistency raises issues about how to identify SBU information, especially scientific and technical information; how to keep it from those who would use it malevolently, while allowing access for those who need to use it; and how to develop uniform nondisclosure policies and penalties.”

The 82-page CRS report presents a comprehensive treatment of this vexing subject. It surveys the origins of government SBU practices; explores “contentious issues” involving SBU; and considers recommendations to improve SBU policy.

CRS does not permit direct public access to its publications, but a copy was obtained by Secrecy News.

See “‘Sensitive But Unclassified’ Information and Other Controls: Policy and Options for Scientific and Technical Information,” dated February 15, 2006 (published March 14, 2006).

The Government Accountability Office yesterday released a report on SBU policies at the Departments of Energy and Defense to coincide with a House Government Reform Subcommittee hearing. See “Managing Sensitive Information: Departments of Energy and Defense Policies and Oversight Could Be Improved,” Report No. GAO-06-369, March 2006.

The National Security Archive conducted its own survey of SBU policies at federal agencies and released a report entitled “Pseudo-Secrets: A Freedom of Information Audit of the U.S. Government’s Policies on Sensitive Unclassified Information.”

publications
See all publications
Clean Energy
Article
Ongoing DOE Staff Shortages Limit Trump Energy Priorities

Occupations with skills essential to making and managing awards were among the hardest hit. As a result, many energy innovation programs ground to a halt in 2025.

07.28.26 | 9 min read
read more
Environment
Policy Statement
Position on the Wildfire Emissions Prevention Act of 2026 (WEPA)

The Federation of American Scientists supports the Wildfire Emissions Prevention Act of 2026 (WEPA). The Act would amend Section 319(b) of the Clean Air Act so that it addresses prescribed burns as a standalone activity. If passed, this bill would support wildfire resilience by reducing administrative barriers to getting needed prescribed burns on the ground.  […]

07.27.26 | 2 min read
read more
Emerging Technology
Blog
International Collaboration to Strengthen Domestic Critical Minerals Efforts

As Congress considers broader packages to advance critical minerals production and supply chain resilience, science diplomacy vehicles must be part of that conversation, not as an afterthought, but as an intentional and foundational pillar of any strategy.

07.24.26 | 5 min read
read more
Emerging Technology
Policy Statement
Endorsement of the Strategic Technology and Resilient Alliances Act

“Structured partnerships with our allies on critical minerals innovation can ensure that the best science and the best talent are working together towards shared security and economic prosperity.”

07.24.26 | 1 min read
read more