Inside This Issue

• Cogswell Award Recipients
• Executive Order 12958
• New CVA Telephone Numbers
• Submission of Standard Form 86 (SF 86)
• Transfers Within A Multiple Facility Organization(MFO)
• Paragraph 10-601c, Access to Classified Information Overseas by Consultants
• FSO Training
• Office of Industrial Security International-Far East
• Availability Of Briefing For User Agencies
• "Catch-em in CONUS" Program
• Employment Termination When There is a Pending Clearance
• Q&A - Disclosure Authority and Need-to-Know for Non-Contract Related Visits

Margaret R. Munson, Director of the Defense Investigative Service, announced the recipients of the Department of Defense's James S. Cogswell Outstanding Industrial Security Achievement Award for 1996 at the National Classification Management Society's 32nd Annual National Training Seminar in Baltimore, Maryland. The annual award is presented to contractors who demonstrate a commitment to industrial security excellence through the maintenance of exemplary security programs. The 1996 Cogswell Award recipients are:

 

AIL Systems
Deer Park, NY
Mr. James M. Smith, President
Mr. Gerald J. Burns, FSO

Amdahl Federal Service Corporation
Reston, VA
Mr. John A. Notaro, President
Mr. Michael Lesko, Vice President - Operations
Ms. Marianne D. Sharp, FSO

Analex Corporation
Littleton, CO
Mr. Larry Gooch, President and Chief Operating Officer
Mr. Stephen C. Dolbey, General Manager, Denver Office
Mr. David L. Fishman, FSO

ARGO Systems, Inc.
Sunnyvale, CA
Mr. Norman A. Scott, President
Mr. John Carney, Director of Security
Mr. James E. Maue, FSO

Avondale Industries, Inc.
Avondale, LA
Mr. Albert L. Bossier, Jr., President
Mr. Dean Church, Vice President Contracts, Legal and International
Mr. Melvin C. Cicero, FSO

BDM Federal, Inc.
McLean, VA
Mr. Bill Hoover, CEO
Mr. Antonio Sablan, FSO
Mr. Chuck McCall, Manager,SCIF

Bell Helicopter Textron
Fort Worth, TX
Mr. Webb Francis Joiner, Chairman
Mr. Barry E. Marsh, Manager, Security, Plant and Fire Protection
Ms. Joyce Robertson, Security Specialist

CAS, Inc.
El Paso, TX
Mr. Jeffrey L. Ellis, Division Manager
Ms. Margarita Saenz, FSO

Computer Sciences Corporation
Calverton, MD
Mr. George O. Meyerson, President, Science Systems Division
Mr. James M. McVay, Vice President, Finance and Administration
Ms. Carol L. Martin, Division Security Manager
Ms. Carlene A. Braun, FSO

Computer Sciences Corporation
Springfield, VA
Mr. Gill F. Livingston, Operations Director
Mr. George M. Sinclair, FSO

Computing Devices International
Bloomington, MN
Mr. Ronald L. Turner, President
Mr. William Fitzgerald, Vice President and General Manager
Ms. Phyllis J. Soderberg, Manager of Government Security
Mr. James J. Prodger, Security Administrator

Contraves, Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
Mr. George H. Dorkhom, President and CEO
Mr. Richard C. May, Manager, Security and Safety

ENSCO, Inc.
Springfield, VA
Mr. Gregory B. Young, President and Chief Operating Officer
Mr. Sydney Schneider, Director, Safety and Security
Mr. John R. Stevenson, FSO
Ms. Debra M. Nickens, Assistant Security Manager

General Dynamics Land Systems, Inc.
Sterling Heights, MI
Mr. Roger E. Tetrault, President
Mr. Gerald K. Bankus, Corporate Vice President for Government Relations
Mr. Patrick J. Sullivan, Vice President, Human Resources and Administration
Mr. Richard E. Proof, FSO

General Dynamics Land Systems Division
Lima, OH
Mr. Richard Gillette, Plant/Division Manager
Ms. Jarilyn L. Coover, FSO

General Electric Aircraft Engines
Cincinnati, OH
Mr. Eugene F. Murphy, President and CEO
Mr. Chalmers F. Rea, Manager, Group Security

GTE Government Systems Corporation
Communication Systems Division
Needham Heights, MA
Mr. John R. Messier, President
Mr. Gerald S. Clarizia, FSO

Hughes Technical Services Company
San Diego, CA
Mr. Jeffrey W. Black, Vice President and Division Manager
Mr. Leland D. Atkinson, Facility Manager
Ms. Mary Anne Yeakley, FSO

Hughes Training, Inc.
Link Division
Kirkwood, NY
Mr. George G. Houser, President
Mr. Joseph E. Dwyer, Director of Corporate Security

J.F. Taylor, Inc.
Lexington Park, MD
Mr. John F. Taylor, President
Ms. Lynn A. Friedman, Contracts Administrator

Johnson Controls World Services, Inc.
Patrick AFB, FL
Mr. James C. Hobin, CEO
Ms. Norma J. Hinds, Director of Business Services
Mr. Everett Watson, FSO

Leet Melbrook, Inc.
Gaithersburg, MD
Mr. James E. Penrod, President
Mr. Robert J. Brown, FSO

Lockheed Martin Corporation
Lockheed Martin Aero & Naval Systems
Baltimore, MD
Mr. Robert B. Coutts, President
Mr. Fattis N. Mann, FSO

Lockheed Martin Corporation
Lockheed Martin Display Systems
Atlanta, GA
Mr. George Lombard, President
Ms. Charlene Heard, FSO

Lockheed Martin Corporation
Lockheed Martin Engineering & Sciences
Houston, TX
Mr. Richard P. Parten, President
Mr. George R. Bose, FSO

Lockheed Martin Corporation
Lockheed Martin Federal Systems - Gaithersburg
Gaithersburg, MD
Mr. Terrance M. Drabant, Plant Manager
Mr. John J. O'Connell, Manager - Group Security
Mr. Paul J. Kelly, Manager, Federal Security Programs
Ms. Kay B. Mehner, FSO

Lockheed Martin Corporation
Lockheed Martin Missiles & Space
Cape Canaveral, FL
Mr. Larry B. Gilliam, Project Director
Mr. Alex M. Pulliam, FSO

Lockheed Martin Corporation
Lockheed Martin Missiles & Space, Strategic Weapons Facility - Pacific
Silverdale, WA
Mr. Stanley R. Zimmer, Resident Director
Mr. John D. Barnard, Budget Operations Manager

Lockheed Martin Corporation
Lockheed Martin Missiles & Space, Western Test Range
Vandenberg AFB, CA
Mr. Robert S. Dalrymple, Program Manager
Mr. Floyd R. Gross, FSO

Lockheed Martin Corporation
Lockheed Martin Ocean, Radar & Sensor Systems
Perry Technologies
Riviera Beach, FL
Mr. William V. Hayes, Director
Mr. Herbert H. VanTrump, FSO

Lockheed Martin Corporation
Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems
Fort Worth, TX
Mr. Dain H. Hancock, President
Mr. B.K. Bradfield, FSO

Lockheed Martin Corporation
Vought Systems
Grand Prairie, TX
Mr. T.C. Cunningham, Vice President, Human Resources
Mr. Herbert D. Pond, Director of Industrial Security

Magnavox Electronic Systems Company
Ft. Wayne, IN
Mr. David P. Molfenter, President and CEO
Mr. James F. Coughlin, Director of Security

Neptune Sciences, Inc.
Slidell, LA
Mr. James E. Paquin, President
Ms. Jacque L. Veglia, FSO

Northrop Grumman Corporation
Electronic Sensors and Systems Division, Sunnyvale Site
Sunnyvale, CA
Mr. James R. Hupton, Vice President
Ms. Patricia Tomaselli, Facility Security Manager

Pacer Systems, Inc.
Panama City Beach, FL
Mr. Sigmund Goldblum, President
Mr. Donald F. Shelley, FSO

PRC Inc.
Colorado Springs, CO
Mr. Herschell L. Atkinson, Operations Center Manager
Mr. William D. Howell, FSO

PRC Inc.
Bala Cynwyd, PA
Mr. Donald M. Kiernan, Department Manager
Mr. Michael H. Skurecki, FSO
Ms. Bernice Robinson, Assistant FSO

PRC Inc.
Arlington, VA
Mr. William Webb, Senior Vice President
Mr. Michael F. Merritt, FSO

Rockwell International Corporation
Collins Avionics and Communications Division (CACD)
Cedar Rapids, IA
Mr. John D. Cosgrove, President
Mr. J. Douglas Hansel, FSO

Rockwell Power Systems Company
Kihei Maui, HI
Mr. Alan J. MacGovern, Director of Maui Operations
Ms. Carol A. Eckmeder, FSO

SCI Technology, Inc.
Huntsville, AL
Mr. Richard A. Holloway, Senior Vice President
Ms. Jackie Rudolph, FSO

Science Applications International Corporation
Albuquerque, NM
Mr. Roger Offerdahl, Vice President and Security Manager
Mr. Charles Adolph, Facility Manager
Ms. Kathy Dolan, FSO

Science Applications International Corporation
San Diego, CA
Mr. Lorenz A. Kull, President
Mr. James P. Linn, Deputy Director, Corporate Security

Science Applications International Corporation
Material Science Group
Dayton, OH
Mr. John O. Sappington, Facility Manager
Ms. Kathleen M. Meuret, FSO

Sonalysts Inc.
Waterford, CT
Mr. Muriel N. Hinkle, President
Mr. Arne Johnson, COO
Mr. Michael J. Wunder, FSO

SRI International
Arlington, VA
Mr. Gerald Connolly, Vice President
Ms. Anna Eikelbarner, FSO

Sverdrup Technology, Inc.
AEDC Group
Arnold AFB, TN
Dr. William F. Kimzey, General Manager
Mr. Jerry H. Jones, Deputy General Manager
Ms. Mary Clay, Security Manager

TASC, Inc.
Reading, MA
Mr. John C. Holt, President and CEO
Mr. Dennis Dionne, Director of Security
Mr. Brian T. Delaney, FSO

Teledyne Brown Engineering
Huntsville, AL
Mr. James McGovern, President
Mr. Stan Miller, Director of Security
Ms. Cecilia Hite, FSO

Texas Instruments
Dallas, TX
Mr. Thomas J. Engibous, President
Mr. James D. Hudman, Facility Security Officer

The Boeing Company
Seattle, WA
Mr. Frank A. Schrontz, Chairman of the Board of Directors
Mr. John Schmit, Executive Vice President
Mr. Richard H. Blay, Director, Security and Fire Protection

Tracor Flight Systems, Inc.
Austin, TX
Mr. Donald L. Fagan, President
Mr. Charles E. Kosser, Jr., Corporate Director of Industrial Security

Tri-State Motor Transit Company
Texarkana, TX
Mr. Jeff Cooney, Vice President, Safety
Mr. Bennie G. Latham, FSO

TRW, Inc.
Systems Integration Group
Strategic Systems Division
Huntsville, AL
Mr. John E. Irby, Operations Manager
Ms. Judy A. Rockett, Security Manager

VITRO Corporation
Marlton, NJ
Mr. David Jensen, Department Head
Ms. Florence A. Phillips, FSO

VITRO Technical Services, Inc.
Eglin Operations
Eglin AFB, FL
Mr. Michael M. Mottern, President and CEO
Mr. Thomas A. Herlihy, FSO

 Executive Order (EO) 12958, Classified National Security Information, was signed by the President on April 17, 1995 and became effective on October 14, 1995. The Order presents an updated system for managing the protection of national security information.

The Order reaffirms both of the two basic classification processes: original classification and derivative classification, and the three levels of classified information (TS, S, C). But it also sets new standards. The original classification authority must now be able to identify or describe the damage to national security that would be expected if the information were improperly disclosed. Also, information will normally be classified only for 10 years, and will require specific action to extend classification beyond those 10 years, if necessary.

The Order eliminates the "OADR" declassification instruction. Original classifiers may no longer use the indefinite duration indicator, "Originating Agency's Determination Required (OADR)." Specific declassification instructions - most often a date or event -must now be shown. However, derivative classifiers may temporarily continue to use OADR under certain circumstances.

EO 12958 requires more detailed document marking. All government agencies must now portion mark documents unless relieved from this requirement by the Information Security Oversight Office. Original classifiers must be identified by name and position title, or by a specific personal identifier, and a concise reason for the classification must be provided. In derivative classification, the source or sources of classification must continue to be shown, as well as declassification instructions.

This Order also authorizes and encourages individuals to challenge the classification of information if they believe the classification is inaccurate or improper.

Until a NISPOM change is published, contractors can use the following general guidelines:

In Industry there is no original classification authority; therefore, there is also no original declassification authority; therefore, contractors shall not automatically declassify anything unless they have obtained, and are following, User Agency Guidance.

When preparing derivatively classified documents, contractors shall use only the "DERIVED FROM" line and the "DECLASSIFY ON" line.
 

When source documents are marked "OADR," documents derivatively prepared from them shall be marked "SOURCE MARKED OADR, DATED (date of source)"

EO 12958 does not apply to RESTRICTED DATA and FORMERLY RESTRICTED DATA.
 

Reference NISPOM paragraph 7-102a and Appendix A, page A-5. Effective June 18, 1996, the new telephone numbers for the Central Verifications Activity are:

(410) 865-2720
(410) 865-2721

When submitting a paper SF 86 or printed EPSQ to DISCO for clearances and periodic reinvestigations that require single scope background investigations (SSBIs), contractors should submit the original and three single-sided copies. All copies must be complete reproductions that include signature. If an SSBI scope investigation or periodic reinvestigation is not required, only the original SF 86 is needed.
 

If contractors elect to have letters of consent (LOCs) issued to the various operating locations of an MFO, transfers of cleared employees within the MFO should be reported to DISCO on the DISCO Form 562. DISCO will not issue an LOC to the gaining facility. The losing facility should send a copy of the Form 562 along with the LOC to the gaining facility. If all LOC's in an MFO are held by the home office facility, transfers within the MFO should not be reported to DISCO. 

Consultants are eligible for access to classified information outside the U.S. and its trust territories and possessions provided overseas travel does not exceed 90 consecutive days. Consultants who reside overseas are generally not eligible for access to U.S. classified information.

NISPOM paragraph 3-102 states that the Facility Security Officer (FSO) shall complete security training as deemed appropriate by the Cognizant Security Agency. As a general rule, all new FSOs must take the Essentials of Industrial Security Management (EISM) Correspondence Course and FSOs of facilities which possess classified information must complete the Protecting SECRET and CONFIDENTIAL Documents (PSCD) Correspondence Course. Beyond the correspondence courses, FSOs of facilities with approved capability to store classified information must attend the FSO Program Management Course within one year of assuming their positions if the facility has safeguarding capability or within one year of the facility acquiring safeguarding capability. In those situations where the FSO possesses a level of knowledge commensurate with the facility's classified involvement, the servicing IS Rep may relieve the FSO of the requirement to take these courses.

There are no academic prerequisites for attendance at the FSO Program Management Course and there is no charge to attend other than any lodging or travel expenses incurred. However, there is now an administrative fee of $27.50 for each of the correspondence courses which is levied by the Army Institute for Professional Development to defray the costs of printing and shipping the course materials as well as enrollment, test grading, record keeping and other student services. FSOs who have taken the Industrial Security Management Course and previous editions of the EISM and PSCD correspondence courses need not take the new versions. If you have any questions regarding the training requirements discussed above, please contact your servicing IS Rep.

Effective May 1, 1996, the San Diego Industrial Field Office assumed industrial security support responsibilities for the operations of cleared contractors in the Far East. The DIS Office of Industrial Security International, Far East (OISI-FE), Camp Zama, Japan has been disestablished. Contractors assigned to Pacific Air Force (PACAF) installations (e.g., Yokota, Misawa, Osan, etc.) continue to fall under the industrial security cognizance of their respective Air Force Information Security Program Manager (ISPM).

This decision was based on the agency's efforts to consolidate and streamline existing field operations. The decision should not be construed as a lessening of commitment to the overseas contractor community, but a response to mandated downsizing and budget reduction initiatives within the federal government.
 

The mailing address and other particulars for the San Diego Industrial Security Field Office are as follows:

Defense Investigative Service
Industrial Security Field Office (S53SD)
16885 W. Bernardo Drive, Suite 150
San Diego, CA 92127-1619

Far East Team Leader: IS Rep. Michael Malmgren

Commercial: (619) 674-4090
FAX: (619) 674-0943

A complete briefing package intended for User Agency contracting and program office personnel is available through your local DIS industrial security field element. The intent of this presentation package is to familiarize User Agency personnel with the mission of DIS, provide an overview of the industrial security program and to address industrial security issues relating to the contracting community such as facility and personnel clearance requirements and the preparation of DD Forms 254. If you would like to receive this presentation, contact your local DIS Industrial Security Field Office, resident office or region headquarters for details (addresses and telephone numbers of the regional offices
are listed in Appendix A of the NISPOM, or call Dick Kraighman at DIS Headquarters at (703) 325-9452).

With the widespread deployment of cleared contractor personnel in support of US military forces overseas, it remains critical that FSO's attempt to identify and initiate clearance processing (or, as applicable, periodic reinvestigations) for employees in advance of the proposed date of assignment overseas. EPSQs or Standard Forms 86 submitted under these circumstances should include a statement that the subject is being assigned overseas, so that the requisite interviews of the employee in question can be conducted prior to departure. This "Catch-em in CONUS" Program has been around for many years, yet we continue to receive requests for clearances or periodic reinvestigations from contractors after the subject of the investigation has departed. Because U.S. military and State Department personnel who must conduct the overseas portion of the investigation are in short supply, the clearance or periodic reinvestigation of a subject living overseas can take many extra months to complete. Please help us to avoid these costly delays! Remember, "Catch-em in CONUS!"

Frequently, an employee who terminates employment with one cleared contractor will immediately go to work for another cleared contractor. If the employee in question is in process for a personnel security clearance, DISCO will stop the investigation upon receipt of the termination notification. The investigation is then started anew when a request for clearance is received from the new facility. Obviously, stopping and starting investigations is wasteful and expensive and eventually slows down the entire clearance process. To prevent this from occurring, we request that if an employee leaves your facility while in process for a clearance, you ask the employee if he or she will be employed in a position that requires a clearance, and, if so, that you verify the requirement with the gaining facility. The name of the gaining facility and clearance level required should be entered into item 15, "REMARKS," DISCO Form 562.

Disclosure authority and need-to-know are related but separate issues. The Government agency that has jurisdiction over the information is responsible for determining whether there is a legitimate need for access to their classified information prior to providing disclosure authority. This is especially important when the Government agency does not have a contract with the company which will be having access. At the same time, the Government agency is not in a position to know if a specific individual from the recipient company has a need-to-know for the information that will be disclosed during the visit. Only the company making the disclosure can realistically make that determination.

QUESTION: Does the disclosure authority issued by the Government for Non-Contract Related visits have to be in writing or can it be verbal?

GUIDANCE: Written approval is required (paragraph 5-509(c), NISPOM). When written approval is impractical due to time constraints, a disclosure may be made with the verbal approval of the applicable contracting activity, provided such approval is subsequently confirmed in writing.

QUESTION: Who determines what is "in furtherance of a contract?"

GUIDANCE: The contractor is normally responsible for determining what is "in furtherance of the contract." If the written authority (DD Form 254 or other guidance) of one company to disclose classified information to another company is unclear, the government contracting activity that has jurisdiction over the classified information to be disclosed should be consulted in advance of the proposed disclosure to obtain advice and, if necessary, written permission to disclose.
 
QUESTION: What is the intent of paragraph 6-109 in terms of need-to-know determinations?

GUIDANCE: Paragraph 6-109 is simply a reiteration of general and long-standing disclosure and need-to-know rules within the context of classified visits. Additional disclosure authority is unnecessary in the case of a contract related visit. Both
disclosure and need-to-know are relevant under non-contract related visits. A recipient must have a requirement for access to the program, project or contract. The need-to-know requirement applies equally to intra-company and inter-company releases. The person who intends to disclose classified information is, of course, responsible for determining whether the intended recipient is an "authorized person" for this purpose (i.e., has the appropriate clearance and need-to-know).

QUESTION: With respect to meetings involving multiple contracts and attended by numerous companies, does the company making the disclosure have to request disclosure approval from all of the responsible Contracting Officers?

GUIDANCE: No. The company making the disclosure may proceed based on disclosure authority from the Government Contracting Activity with the major interest in the meeting.