The Central Intelligence Agency has released three of its internal personnel regulations in redacted form as part of a defense against charges that it improperly dismissed a former undercover contract employee.
A 2002 regulation signed by then-DCI George Tenet established the CIA Personnel Evaluation Board (pdf), which is “the primary mechanism for reviewing employee suitability and security cases that may result in the imposition of serious discipline, termination of employment, or revocation of security clearances.”
The “circumstances under which Agency employment may be terminated” are described in another 2002 regulation (pdf).
The role of “contract employees” — which are not the same as “contractors” — is described in a third redacted CIA regulation (pdf).
The regulations were disclosed by CIA in response to a lawsuit filed by “Peter B.” (pdf), a covert contract employee who alleged that he was wrongly terminated and was subjected to unlawful retaliation by the CIA.
The CIA replied (pdf) that the CIA Director “has discretion to terminate a person employed by the CIA for any reason and the decision is not subject to review.”
The newly disclosed CIA personnel regulations were characterized in a declaration (pdf) by CIA information review officer Linda Dove.
“One thing became increasingly clear: AI doesn’t simply introduce a new category of risk. It changes the speed, scale, complexity, and interaction of risks that already exist.”
In an ideal world, we would not have state or federal climate intervention research bans. We would have researchers and institutions that would not shy away from revealing the good, the bad, and the ugly of these technologies and doing so responsibly.
“What excites me is that it’s very tempting to be very discouraged, and say, ‘Oh, we’ve got these archaic institutions that are calcified and you could never change them.’ But I think we’re in the middle of a technological revolution that will upend lots of things, and does provide a window.”
Ask people what worries them most right now, and they’ll say the cost of living and their livelihoods, not climate change. But those concerns are not separate.