Seeking Reciprocity in Security Clearance Policy
Reciprocity in security clearances — meaning the acceptance by one agency of a security clearance granted by another agency, and vice versa — has been an elusive security policy goal for well over a decade. But lately it has become the subject of increased attention.
“The Director [of National Intelligence] has done little to ensure the reciprocal recognition of security clearances within the [Intelligence] Community,” the House Intelligence Committee complained in its new report (pdf).
“It def[ies] common sense… that it takes months to transfer clearances for an individual who will work in the exact same space but transfer from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency to the CIA,” the House report said.
A July 17 memo from the Office of Management and Budget addresses the problem of reciprocity in highly restricted “special access programs,” and provides a checklist of permitted exceptions to reciprocity.
The Department of Defense and Department of Energy have each issued new directives lately on reciprocal recognition of security clearances.
It is in the interests of the United States to appropriately protect information that needs to be protected while maintaining our participation in new discoveries to maintain our competitive advantage.
The question is not whether the capital exists (it does!), nor whether energy solutions are available (they are!), but whether we can align energy finance quickly enough to channel the right types of capital where and when it’s needed most.
Our analysis of federal AI governance across administrations shows that divergent compliance procedures and uneven institutional capacity challenge the government’s ability to deploy AI in ways that uphold public trust.
From California to New Jersey, wildfires are taking a toll—costing the United States up to $424 billion annually and displacing tens of thousands of people. Congress needs solutions.