RE: NASA Implementation of Homeland Security Presidential Directive
#12 (HSPD-12)
Dear Congressman Dreier:
I am an employee of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory
and reside in Sierra Madre so I am doubly a constituent of yours. I am
quite concerned with the implementation of HSPD-12 by JPL/Caltech under
direction of NASA. To wit: I believe it to be an unwarranted
intrusion into my personal life and an unconstitutional violation of my
civil rights.
President Bush was quite explicit in HSPD-12 that
his intent is provide secure access to Government facilities. Quoting
from his opening statement, “Wide variations in the quality and
security of forms of identification used to gain access to secure
Federal and other facilities where there is potential for terrorist
attacks need to be eliminated. Therefore, it is the policy of the
United States to enhance security, increase Government efficiency,
reduce identity fraud, and protect personal privacy by establishing a
mandatory, Government-wide standard for secure and reliable forms of
identification issued by the Federal Government to its employees and
contractors (including contractor employees).” I, and a number of
others at JPL and other NASA Centers, now find that this order,
intended to establish a common standard of identification for access to
federal facilities, is in fact being used to gather a wide range of
sensitive personal information. Specifically, a full set of ten
fingerprints, information on past and current residences, military
service, education history, information on financial delinquencies, any
arrests for anything greater than a $150 traffic fine, and similar
information on parents, spouses and family members, etc. The
information will be provided to the FBI for a full criminal
investigation. Additionally, releases must be signed allowing full
release of this information as well as credit checks and release of
medical information. The forms state that this is completely
“voluntary”, however lack of compliance will result in termination of
employment – hardly voluntary. Even further, we must specifically
agree to release Caltech from any responsibility should harm result
from the misuse of the information Caltech is gathering to be turned
over to NASA which will in turn be turned over to the FBI and any
private contractors those agencies choose to engage for support. The
details of the process are detailed in Department of Commerce
Publication 201 (FIPS 201), a lengthy document available at: http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips201-1/FIPS-201-1-chng1.pdf
It is interesting to note that much of this
information is to be gathered via a web based “e-Qip” form. As
anyone under the age of 70 and over 6 knows, nothing submitted via the
web is truly secure. I wish to make a few other important points:
1. None of this is required by HSPD-12. Only a “Government-wide
standard for secure and reliable forms of identification”. In the
Presidential directive there is no mention of criminal or security
background checks, no mention of fingerprinting, no mention of
providing private information to unknown parties. No mention that
fingerprints of all government employees and contractors will be added
to the FBI database.
2. In a number of ways the above process, which I have described only
briefly, violates provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974, specifically,
“No agency shall disclose any record which is contained in a system of
records by any means of communication to any person, or to another
agency, except pursuant to a written request by, or with the prior
written consent of, the individual to whom the record pertain,” yet
HSPD-12 specifically says, “(6) This directive shall be implemented in
a manner consistent with the Constitution and applicable laws,
including the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) and other statutes protecting
the rights of Americans.” Thus we are placed in the position of
either waiving our rights as guaranteed by law and the Constitution, or
losing our jobs.
3. Many of us who work for NASA either as civil servants or
contractors, chose this career specifically to work for the civilian
space agency, free of security clearances and the attendant
restrictions on free publication and exchange of scientific and
engineering research. There has never been a need for this sort of
background check within NASA, nor is there now, except for those who by
preference choose to work on the limited amount of classified work done
within the agency or in conjunction with other agencies.
4. I began my career in 1968 with TRW in Houston designing the
trajectories to lunar landing sites for the Apollo Program. I later
worked for Martin Marietta Aerospace Corp. in Denver (now
Lockheed-Martin), primarily on NASA contracts, however I had a secret
clearance and decided to terminate that clearance and leave Martin for
JPL to work on unclassified civilian endeavors. Although it is not the
point of this letter, I have served in senior management capacities at
JPL (section manager) and am currently the Chief Engineer for Flight
Dynamics. I serve on multiple NASA-wide review boards and am a member
of the Astrodynamics Technical Committee of the American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) and formerly served as chair of
that body. My opinion is sought for critical decisions on many NASA
missions. I have now been at JPL for nearly 30 years, have never been
accused of a crime, nor have I committed any.
5. I, too, have been an elected official, having served for eleven
years on The Vallicito Union School Board of Trustees (seven of those
years as President of the Board). The People of California and the
County of Calaveras saw fit to have me oversee the education of their
young people from 1977 through 1988 and did not find it necessary to
start from the assumption that I was a criminal whose background must
be cleared and privacy violated before declaring me fit to serve.
6. The chilling effect of this draconian process will cause the
loss of valuable contributors to the NASA mission, both those
currently employed and perhaps more far reaching in the loss of
potential employees who will chose to work in either an academic or
commercial field which does not subject them to outrageous invasion of
privacy. Although I am within a few years of “normal retirement” age,
it has long been my intent to continue working in the field I love for
as long as I am able and welcome. This new badging process
unfortunately may leave me with three equally unpalatable choices: a)
take early retirement, b) compromise my principles, lose my privacy and
my self respect, or c) bring public legal action against an institution
which I love and respect. I have inquired as to the basis in law for
this process of the NASA Privacy Officer, Ms. Patti Stockman. The
response from her simply stated that since I was inquiring with respect
to a specific legal question she referred my question the Office of the
NASA General Counsel. No answer from them has been forthcoming.
Two of my colleagues, Senior Research Scientists
here at JPL, are constituents of Congressman Adam Schiff. They have
presented similar concerns and supporting material to him, both in
writing and in a personal meeting. The topics I have presented here are
neither partisan nor ideological and I know that both you and
Congressman Schiff are great friends of JPL. It is my hope that you
will investigate these matters and consider appropriate action to
protect the rights of your constituents as well as the interests of
JPL, NASA and indeed our Nation.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I am
available to discuss this matter with you at your convenience and can
provide more detail as necessary. I remain,
Sincerely yours,
Dennis V. Byrnes
[back to HSPD-12 Problems at GSFC]