John Cornyn Slams Proposed Sensible Classification Policy: 'There’s Not A Lot Of Secrets Being Kept’

3 months ago

Earlier this month, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) questioned officials on proposed policy related to security clearance during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.

Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:

https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript

Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com

Transcript

00:00and I know Senator Cornyn's been an advocate on this as well. Senator Cornyn, you're up.

00:04Well, let me start with where Senator Wyden left off, and Senator Warner,

00:10the Sensible Classification Act that we passed last year. Part of that required studies and

00:17recommendations on the necessity of security clearances. I believe the testimony we've heard

00:22was that there are four million people with security clearances in America.

00:28If four million people are supposed to keep the nation's secrets, it seems to me that there's a

00:34lot of not secrets being kept. I mean, the things are not secrets. And we've learned that some of

00:41the FTEs require a security clearance without regard to actually the necessity of that person

00:48getting a security clearance and the like. So what I wanted to ask is, have the agencies that

00:55you oversee begun the studies on the necessity of security clearances, including a description of

01:02how the agencies will make sure that the number of security clearances granted will be kept to

01:07a minimum? Let me start with you, Dr. Dixon. I actually don't know the answer to that

01:10question. I will go back and find out whether the studies have begun.

01:14That concerns me. You're the Deputy Director of National Intelligence. You don't

01:19have that information? That particular one, no, sir, I do not.

01:23Any of the rest of you have any knowledge of any studies that have been

01:29done or are in the process of being done as required by the statute?

01:35Okay. Well, that's kind of not a great start. Let me go back.

01:44As I understand it, the Defense Counterintelligence Security Agency was established in 2018. Of

01:50course, the NBIS, the personal vetting system was supposed to be the end-to-end IT infrastructure to

01:58enable the comprehensive personal vetting on a single platform. It was originally supposed to

02:09be completed by 2019. That was five years ago at a cost of $700 million, but here we are five years

02:17later and the program's not operational and $850 million has been spent. Can any of you tell us

02:26when the NBIS will become operational?

02:35We have delivered some NBIS capability to date. At this time, as part of the 90-day effort,

02:42we are rebaselining to make sure we understand exactly...

02:46That means you're starting over?

02:47We're not starting over. As I think you've heard some of the other witnesses talk about,

02:51we're looking to make sure that we can use what has been built. We are exploring exactly what

02:58needs to happen going forward to ensure we meet the full level of capability that is expected

03:03from the system. At this time, we are in the process of refining exactly our understanding

03:08of that timeline. I commit to... In other words, you can't tell us at this point?

03:13I cannot tell you at this point. What I can commit to is that we will keep this committee

03:17informed as those estimates take shape. We are going through the process, as I discussed,

03:23to work with the Undersecretary for Acquisition and Sustainment as part of that. We are rebaselining

03:28the program. We will have an independent cost estimate. All of these are things that I commit

03:32to keeping the committee informed on as this work takes shape. It couldn't happen in 90 days. This

03:37is a month-long effort, but we are fully committed to making sure that you have the full visibility

03:42as it comes together. You can't tell us when the NBIS will be operational at this point.

03:49As I look at the new NBIS program manager and program executive officer has identified,

03:57it looks like, four main reasons why this program is overdue and over budget.

04:06One was the trouble with requirements. The second is too much focus on technical debt.

04:12The third is poor contract management, and the fourth is insufficient time and criteria for

04:18review. The GAO, the General Accountability Office, has conducted multiple studies and made

04:24a variety of recommendations. Are those recommendations being implemented in the

04:32current efforts? Senator, yes, they are. We are taking corrective action on those. That's

04:38one commitment that I make to this committee and to my agency. Who is in charge in the sense that

04:48there needs to be somebody held accountable? As long as everybody is accountable,

04:53no one is accountable, who is in charge of making sure this program is back on track

04:58and will be delivered as promised? I believe that as the program sponsor,

05:05the Undersecretary for Intelligence and Security has responsibility. It's a shared responsibility

05:11with the Undersecretary for Acquisition and Sustainment to ensure that this program is

05:16sufficiently overseen and that we are doing this soundly and in line with the requirements as they

05:21have been stated. So the Department of Defense is responsible? The Department of Defense is

05:25responsible, and we are fully committed to making sure that this is the path to success for NBIS

05:30as we move forward. It's no surprise to me that a program as complex as this is overdue

05:42and over budget when apparently the most basic requirements were never identified initially.

05:49Is that correct? I think the requirements were outlined in Trusted Workforce 2.0. I think what

05:55we had was a breakdown in how those requirements were being managed into technical requirements for

06:01the development and how we were taking account of the delays in that process. And that is something

06:06that we are seeking to remedy immediately with more proactive oversight from the Undersecretary

06:11of INS's office in partnership with DCSA as we look to make sure we put this on a sound foundation.

06:17My time is overdue.

John Cornyn Slams Proposed Sensible Classification Policy: 'There’s Not A Lot Of Secrets Being Kept’

Category

Transcript

Recommended