69–006 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 110–776 

REDUCING OVER-CLASSIFICATION ACT OF 2008 

JULY 24, 2008.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi, from the Committee on Homeland 

Security, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 4806] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Homeland Security, to whom was referred the 

bill (H.R. 4806) to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to 

develop a strategy to prevent the over-classification of homeland security and other information and to promote the sharing of unclassified homeland security and other information, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with 

an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Purpose and Summary ............................................................................................ 4 

Background and Need for Legislation .................................................................... 5 

Hearings ................................................................................................................... 6 

Committee Consideration ........................................................................................ 6 

Committee Votes ...................................................................................................... 7 

Committee Oversight Findings ............................................................................... 7 

New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures ............. 7 

Congressional Budget Office Estimate ................................................................... 7 

Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives .................................... 9 

Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff Benefits ... 9 

Federal Mandates Statement ................................................................................. 10 

Advisory Committee Statement .............................................................................. 10 

Constitutional Authority Statement ...................................................................... 10 

Applicability to Legislative Branch ........................................................................ 10 

Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation ...................................................... 10 

Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ..................................... 12 

Committee Correspondence .................................................................................... 17 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
2 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Reducing Over-Classification Act of 2008’’. 

SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

Congress finds the following: 

(1) A key conclusion in the Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (commonly known as the ‘‘9/11 Commission’’) was the need to prevent over-classification by the Federal Government. 

(2) The 9/11 Commission and others have observed that the over-classification 

of homeland security information interferes with accurate, actionable, and timely homeland security information sharing, increases the cost of information security, and needlessly limits public access to information. 

(3) The over-classification problem, which has worsened since the 9/11 attacks, causes considerable confusion about what information can be shared with 

whom both internally at the Department of Homeland Security and with its external partners. This problem negatively impacts the dissemination of homeland 

security information to the Department’s State, local, tribal, and territorial 

homeland security and law enforcement partners, private sector customers, and 

the public. 

(4) Excessive government secrecy stands in the way of a safer and more secure homeland. This trend is antithetical to the creation and operation of the 

information sharing environment established under section 1016 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (6 U.S.C. 485), and must 

be halted and reversed. 

(5) To do so, the Department should start with the understanding that all departmental information that is not properly classified, or marked as controlled 

unclassified information and otherwise exempt from disclosure, should be made 

available to members of the public pursuant to section 552 of title 5, United 

States Code (commonly referred to as the ‘‘Freedom of Information Act’’). 

(6) The Department should also develop and administer policies, procedures, 

and programs that promote compliance with applicable laws, executive orders, 

and other authorities pertaining to the proper use of classification markings and 

the United States National Archives and Records Administration policies implementing them. 

SEC. 3. OVER-CLASSIFICATION PREVENTION WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY. 

Subtitle A of title II of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 121 et seq.) 

is amended by adding at the end the following new section: 

‘‘SEC. 210F. OVER-CLASSIFICATION PREVENTION PROGRAM. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall develop and administer policies, procedures, and programs within the Department to prevent the over-classification of 

homeland security information, terrorism information, weapons of mass destruction 

information, and other information within the scope of the information sharing environment established under section 1016 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism 

Prevention Act of 2004 (6 U.S.C. 485) that must be disseminated to prevent and to 

collectively respond to acts of terrorism. The Secretary shall coordinate with the Archivist of the United States and consult with representatives of State, local, tribal, 

and territorial government and law enforcement, organizations with expertise in 

civil rights, civil liberties, and government oversight, and the private sector, as appropriate, to develop such policies, procedures, and programs. 

‘‘(b) REQUIREMENTS.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of 

the Reducing Over-Classification Act of 2008, the Secretary, in administering the 

policies, procedures, and programs required under subsection (a), shall—

‘‘(1) create, in consultation with the Archivist of the United States, standard 

classified and unclassified formats for finished intelligence products created by 

the Department, consistent with any government-wide standards, practices or 

procedures for similar products; 

‘‘(2) require that all finished intelligence products created by the Department 

be simultaneously prepared in the standard unclassified format, provided that 

such an unclassified product would reasonably be expected to be of any benefit 

to a State, local, tribal or territorial government, law enforcement agency or 

other emergency response provider, or the private sector, based on input provided by the Interagency Threat Assessment and Coordination Group Detail established under section 210D; 

‘‘(3) ensure that such policies, procedures, and programs protect the national 

security as well as the information privacy rights and legal rights of United 

States persons pursuant to all applicable law and policy, including the privacy 

guidelines for the information sharing environment established pursuant to secVerDate Aug 31 2005 04:02 Jul 27, 2008 Jkt 069006 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\HR776.XXX HR776

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
3 

tion 1016 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (6 

U.S.C. 485), as appropriate; ‘‘(4) establish an ongoing auditing mechanism administered by the Inspector 

General of the Department or other appropriate senior Department official that 

randomly selects, on a periodic basis, classified information from each component of the Department that generates finished intelligence products to— ‘‘(A) assess, on an individualized basis, whether applicable classification 

policies, procedures, rules, and regulations have been followed; ‘‘(B) describe any problems with the administration of the applicable classification policies, procedures, rules, and regulations, including specific noncompliance issues; ‘‘(C) recommend improvements in awareness and training to address 

them; and ‘‘(D) report at least annually to the Committee on Homeland Security of 

the House of Representatives, the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs of the Senate, and the public, in an appropriate format, on the findings of the Inspector General’s audits under this section; ‘‘(5) establish a process whereby employees may challenge original classification decisions made by Department employees or contractors and be rewarded 

with specific incentives for successful challenges resulting in the removal of 

classification markings or the downgrading of them; ‘‘(6) inform employees and contractors that failure to comply with the policies, 

procedures, and programs established under this section could subject them to 

a series of penalties; and ‘‘(7) institute a series of penalties for employees and contractors who repeatedly fail to comply with the policies, procedures, and programs established 

under this section after having received both notice of their noncompliance and 

appropriate training or re-training to address such noncompliance. ‘‘(c) FINISHED INTELLIGENCE PRODUCT DEFINED.—The term ‘finished intelligence 

product’ means a document in which an intelligence analyst has evaluated, interpreted, integrated, or placed into context raw intelligence or information.’’. 

SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT OF OVER-CLASSIFICATION PREVENTION WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT 

OF HOMELAND SECURITY. 

Subtitle A of title II of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 121 et seq.) 

is further amended by adding at the end the following new section: 

‘‘SEC. 210G. ENFORCEMENT OF OVER-CLASSIFICATION PREVENTION PROGRAMS. 

‘‘(a) PERSONAL IDENTIFIERS.—The Secretary shall—

‘‘(1) assess the technologies available or in use at the Department by which 

an electronic personal identification number or other electronic identifying 

marker can be assigned to each Department employee and contractor with original classification authority in order to—

‘‘(A) track which documents have been classified by a particular employee 

or contractor; 

‘‘(B) determine the circumstances when such documents have been 

shared; 

‘‘(C) identify and address over-classification problems, including the 

misapplication of classification markings to documents that do not merit 

such markings; and 

‘‘(D) assess the information sharing impact of any such problems or misuse; 

‘‘(2) develop an implementation plan for a Department standard for such technology with appropriate benchmarks, a timetable for its completion, and cost estimate for the creation and implementation of a system of electronic personal 

identification numbers or other electronic identifying markers for all relevant 

Department employees and contractors; and 

‘‘(3) upon completion of the implementation plan described in paragraph (2), 

or not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of the Reducing OverClassification Act of 2008, whichever is earlier, the Secretary shall provide a 

copy of the plan to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate. 

‘‘(b) TRAINING.—The Secretary, in coordination with the Archivist of the United 

States, shall—

‘‘(1) require annual training for each Department employee and contractor 

with classification authority and who are responsible for analysis, dissemination, preparation, production, receiving, publishing, or otherwise communicating 

written classified information, including training to—

‘‘(A) educate each employee and contractor about—


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
4 

‘‘(i) the Department’s requirement that all classified finished intelligence products that they create be simultaneously prepared in unclassified form in a standard format prescribed by the Department, provided that the unclassified product would reasonably be expected to be 

of any benefit to a State, local, tribal, or territorial government, law enforcement agency, or other emergency response provider, or the private 

sector, based on input provided by the Interagency Threat Assessment 

and Coordination Group Detail established under section 210D; 

‘‘(ii) the proper use of classification markings, including portion 

markings; and 

‘‘(iii) the consequences of over-classification and other improper uses 

of classification markings, including the misapplication of classification 

markings to documents that do not merit such markings, and of failing 

to comply with the Department’s policies and procedures established 

under or pursuant to this section, including the negative consequences 

for the individual’s personnel evaluation, homeland security, information sharing, and the overall success of the Department’s missions; 

‘‘(B) serve as a prerequisite, once completed successfully, as evidenced by 

an appropriate certificate, for—

‘‘(i) obtaining classification authority; and 

‘‘(ii) renewing such authority annually; and 

‘‘(C) count as a positive factor, once completed successfully, in the Department’s employment, evaluation, and promotion decisions; and 

‘‘(2) ensure that such program is conducted efficiently, in conjunction with any 

other security, intelligence, or other training programs required by the Department to reduce the costs and administrative burdens associated with the additional training required by this section. 

‘‘(c) DETAILEE PROGRAM.—The Secretary shall—

‘‘(1) implement a Departmental detailee program to detail Departmental personnel to the National Archives and Records Administration for one year, for 

the purpose of—

‘‘(A) training and educational benefit for the Department personnel assigned so that they may better understand the policies, procedures and 

laws governing original classification authorities; 

‘‘(B) bolstering the ability of the National Archives and Records Administration to conduct its oversight authorities over the Department and other 

Departments and agencies; and 

‘‘(C) ensuring that the policies and procedures established by the Secretary remain consistent with those established by the Archivist of the 

United States; 

‘‘(2) ensure that the program established under paragraph (1) includes at 

least one individual for each Department office with delegated original classification authority; and 

‘‘(3) in coordination with the Archivist of the United States, report to Congress not later than 90 days after the conclusion of the first year of the program 

established under paragraph (1), on—

‘‘(A) the advisability of expanding the program on a government-wide 

basis, whereby other departments and agencies would send detailees to the 

National Archives and Records Administration; and 

‘‘(B) the administrative and monetary costs of full compliance with this 

section. 

‘‘(d) SUNSET OF DETAILEE PROGRAM.—Except as otherwise provided by law, subsection (c) shall cease to have effect on December 31, 2012. 

‘‘(e) FINISHED INTELLIGENCE PRODUCT DEFINED.—The term ‘finished intelligence 

product’ has the meaning given the term in section 210F(c).’’. 

SEC. 5. TECHNICAL AMENDMENT. 

The table of contents in section 1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 

U.S.C. 101(b)) is amended by adding after the item relating to section 210E the following new items: 

‘‘Sec. 210F. Over-classification prevention program. 

‘‘Sec. 210G. Enforcement of over-classification prevention programs.’’. 

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

The purpose of H.R. 4806 is to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop a strategy to prevent the over-classification of homeland security and other information and to promote the 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
5 

sharing of unclassified homeland security and other information, 

and for other purposes. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

The Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, commonly known as the ‘‘9/11 Commission Report’’, found that the Federal Intelligence Community’s 

information security policies and practices impeded the kinds of robust information sharing required to prevent and otherwise prepare for terrorist attacks. Specifically, it found that security requirements nurtured over-classification and excessive 

compartmentation of information among agencies in several respects: (1) each agency’s incentive structure opposed sharing, with 

clear risks but few rewards for sharing information; (2) no one had 

to pay the long term costs of over-classifying information, though 

this cost is substantial; (3) there were no punishments for not sharing information; and (4) agencies upheld a ‘‘need-to-know’’ culture 

of information protection rather than promoting a ‘‘need-to-share’’ culture of integration. While some progress has been made, more 

work needs to be done within Federal agencies to ensure that overclassification truly becomes a thing of the past. 

Over-classification can be defined as the automatic decision to 

classify government information rather than the informed, deliberative process outlined under Executive Order 12958, as amended 

by E.O. 13292. Since 1940, classification of official secrets has been 

governed by policies and procedures flowing from this Executive 

Order. In the years since the attacks of September 11, 2001, the 

tension between the need to protect certain types of highly sensitive information and the need to share such information with people or entities with a need to know has grown considerably. Security concerns after the attacks prompted some agencies and departments to increase the categories and volume of information shielded from public view by using Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret security classification markings. 

The Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) within the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is responsible 

for Executive Branch oversight of security classification matters. 

The 2005 ISOO Report to the President noted that there were eight 

million new classification actions in 2001, which jumped to over 14 

million new actions in 2005, while the quantity of declassified 

pages dropped from 100 million in 2001 to 29 million in 2005. The 

ISOO also identified the cost of over-classification as a problem: 

while $4.5 billion was spent on classification in 2001, this figure increased to $7.1 billion in 2004. Declassification costs, by contrast, 

fell from $232 million in 2001 to $48.3 million in 2004. 

This continuing trend is an obstacle to accurate, actionable, and 

timely information sharing across the Federal Government and 

with its State, local, and tribal partners—including with the Department of Homeland Security’s partners in the law enforcement 

and wider first responder communities. Unless and until the Nation has a robust intelligence and information sharing system in 

place, with a clear and understandable system of classification, it 

will be unable to prevent a terrorist attack on the scale of 9/11 or 

greater. The Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing 

and Terrorism Risk Assessment accordingly focused its efforts durVerDate Aug 31 2005 04:02 Jul 27, 2008 Jkt 069006 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR776.XXX HR776

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
6 

ing the 110th Congress on addressing the over-classification problem and improving the Department’s information sharing with the 

Nation’s ‘‘first preventers’’—the police and sheriffs’ officers that 

bring homeland security to America’s hometowns. H.R. 4806 is the 

culmination of that oversight work and promises to make the Department the ‘‘gold standard’’ within the Federal Intelligence Community when it comes to compliance with applicable classification 

law, executive orders, and other relevant authorities—promoting 

more and better information sharing in the process. 

HEARINGS

No hearings were held on H.R. 4806, however, the Committee 

held oversight hearings on over-classification. 

On March 22, 2007, the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment held a hearing entitled ‘‘Over-classification and Pseudo-classification: The Impact on 

Information Sharing.’’ The Subcommittee received testimony from 

Mr. J. William Leonard, Director, Information Security Oversight 

Office, National Archives and Records Administration, Mr. Scott 

Armstrong, Founder, Information Trust, Ms. Meredith Fuchs, General Counsel, The National Security Archive, George Washington 

University, Chief Cathy L. Lanier, Metropolitan Police Department, Washington, D.C., and Mr. Michael P. Downing, Assistant 

Commanding Officer, Counter-Terrorism/Criminal Intelligence Bureau, Los Angeles Police Department. 

On April 26, 2007, the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information 

Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment held a hearing entitled 

‘‘The Over-Classification and Pseudo-Classification of Government 

Information: The Response of the Program Manager of the Information Sharing Environment.’’ The Subcommittee received testimony from Ambassador Thomas E. McNamara, Program Manager, 

Information Sharing Environment, Office of the Director of National Intelligence; Carter Morris, Ph.D., Director, Informational 

Sharing and Knowledge Management, Office of Intelligence and 

Analysis, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Wayne M. Murphy, Assistant Director, Directorate of Intelligence, Federal Bureau 

of Investigation, Department of Justice, Colonel Bart R. Johnson, 

New York State Police; and Mr. Mark Zadra, Assistant Commissioner, Florida Department of Law Enforcement. 

On June 28, 2007, the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information 

Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment held a hearing entitled 

‘‘Over-Classification and Pseudo-Classification: Making DHS the 

Gold Standard for Designating Classified and Sensitive Homeland 

Security Information.’’ The Subcommittee received testimony from 

Mr. J. William Leonard, Director, Information Security Oversight 

Office, National Archives and Record Administration; Mr. Scott 

Armstrong, Founder, Information Trust; Ms. Suzanne E. 

Spaulding, Principal, Bingham Consulting Group, LLC; and Mr. 

Mark Agrast, Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress. 

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

H.R. 4806 was introduced in the House on December 18, 2007, 

by Ms. Harman and 13 original co-sponsors and referred solely to 

the Committee on Homeland Security. Within the Committee, H.R. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
7 

4806 was referred to the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information 

Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment. 

The Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment considered H.R. 4806 on June 11, 2008, 

and ordered the measure favorably forwarded to the Full Committee for consideration, amended, by unanimous consent. 

The Subcommittee adopted the bill, as amended, by unanimous 

consent. 

The following amendment was offered: 

An Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Ms. 

Harman (#1), was AGREED TO by unanimous consent. 

The Committee considered H.R. 4806 on June 26, 2008 and ordered the measure to be reported to the House favorably, as 

amended, by voice vote. 

The Committee adopted the measure, as amended, by unanimous 

consent. 

The following amendment was offered: 

An Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute offered by Ms. 

Harman (#1); was AGREED TO by unanimous consent. 

COMMITTEE VOTES

Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires the Committee to list the recorded votes on the motion to report legislation and amendments thereto. 

No recorded votes were requested during Committee consideration. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Committee has held oversight hearings and 

made findings that are reflected in this report. 

NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX

EXPENDITURES

In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee finds that H.R. 4806, the 

Reducing Over-Classification Act of 2007, would result in no new 

or increased budget authority, entitlement authority, or tax expenditures or revenues. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by 

the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 

402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
8 

U.S. CONGRESS, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, Washington, DC, July 10, 2008. 

Hon. BENNIE G. THOMPSON, 

Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4806, the Reducing OverClassification Act of 2008. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Jason Wheelock. 

Sincerely, 

ROBERT A. SUNSHINE

(For Peter R. Orszag, Director). 

Enclosure. 

H.R. 4806—Reducing Over-Classification Act of 2008 

H.R. 4806 would make several amendments to the Homeland Security Act of 2002 designed to expand the amount of homeland security and intelligence information that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) shares with state and local governments, law 

enforcement agencies, emergency response providers, and privatesector organizations. This information sharing would be accomplished by minimizing the number of documents DHS determines 

to be classified, and providing classified intelligence products in an 

unclassified format when such intelligence products would benefit 

those entities. The bill also would require periodic auditing of classified information to assess compliance with classification policies 

and training for DHS employees on those new requirements. 

H.R. 4806 also would require DHS to assess technologies that 

would allow the department to track the classification and sharing 

of classified documents, and develop a plan for implementing such 

technologies. Since the bill would not require DHS to deploy such 

technologies, this estimate does not include implementation costs. 

However, based on information from DHS and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, CBO anticipates that such costs 

could be significant. 

DHS would incur small incremental costs related to the periodic 

auditing of classified documents and the additional training that 

would be required by the bill. Since DHS already conducts compliance reviews to determine whether documents are properly classified and has an annual training program for its employees, CBO 

anticipates that the cost of implementing H.R. 4806 would be less 

than $500,000 a year, assuming the availability of appropriated 

funds. Enacting the legislation would not affect direct spending or 

revenues. 

H.R. 4806 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jason Wheelock. This 

estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
9 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, H.R. 4806, contains the following general performance goals, and objectives, including outcome related goals and 

objectives authorized. 

The only way to ensure that accurate, actionable, and timely 

classified homeland security information is shared between the 

Federal Government and its State, local, tribal, and private sector 

partners is to create a classification system that is enforceable, understandable, and applicable to everyone. Almost seven years after 

the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Nation should be treating 

far less information as classified and instead should be making fixing the problem of over-classification a top priority. A recurrent 

theme throughout the Final Report of the National Commission on 

Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (9/11 Commission Report) was the need to address the persistent problem of over-classification in order to remove a major stumbling block to preventing, 

preparing for, and responding to terrorist attacks. While a Government-wide solution would be beneficial, the Department of Homeland Security is an excellent place to start making changes. 

Through the policies, procedures, and programs established in H.R. 

4806, the Department will become a ‘‘best practices’’ center for fixing the problems of the past and a test bed for the rest of the Federal Government. 

The goals of this measure are to ensure that Department employees and contractors apply the existing classification regime in strict 

accordance with applicable law, executive orders, and other authorities. This approach will help prevent over-classification and 

maximize the disclosure of homeland security and other information within the scope of the Information Sharing Environment that 

must be disseminated to prevent and to collectively respond to acts 

of terrorism. To facilitate this change, this measure will accomplish 

several key objectives: (1) promote a common understanding among 

Department employees and contractors that classified markings are 

not to be used to protect political turf or to hide embarrassing facts 

from public view; (2) develop best practices that ensure that Department classification practice adheres to applicable laws, executive orders, and other relevant authorities; (3) promote a variety of 

accountability measures that identifies over-classification problems 

and their sources and recommend and implement strategies to address them; and (4) bolster public confidence in the Department’s 

information sharing mission through these and other measures 

that promote accountability, integrity, and transparency across the 

Department. 

CONGRESSIONAL EARMARKS, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, AND LIMITED

TARIFF BENEFITS

In compliance with rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, this bill, as reported, contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 

clause 9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of the rule XXI. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
10 

FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 

pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this legislation. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Committee finds that the Constitutional authority for this legislation is provided in Article I, section 8, clause 

1, which grants Congress the power to provide for the common Defense of the United States. 

APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to the 

terms and conditions of employment or access to public services or 

accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title 

This section states that that this measure may be cited as the 

‘‘Reducing Over-Classification Act of 2008’’. 

Section 2. Findings 

This section outlines a series of Congressional findings, including: (1) over-classification of homeland security information interferes with information sharing; increases the cost of information security; and needlessly limits public access to information; (2) this 

trend stands in the way of a safer homeland and must be halted 

and reversed; (3) accordingly, the Department of Homeland Security should start with the understanding that information that is 

not properly classified—or otherwise exempt from disclosure— should be made publicly available pursuant to an appropriate Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request; and (4) the Department 

should develop and administer policies, procedures and programs 

that promote compliance with applicable laws, executive orders, 

and other authorities pertaining to the proper use of classification 

markings. 

Section 3. Over-classification prevention within the Department of 

Homeland Security 

This section modifies title II of the Homeland Security Act of 

2002 (P.L. 107–296) to require the Secretary of Homeland Security 

to develop and administer policies, procedures and programs to prevent the over-classification of homeland security information and 

other information that must be disseminated to prevent and to collectively respond to acts of terrorism. This section requires the SecVerDate Aug 31 2005 04:02 Jul 27, 2008 Jkt 069006 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR776.XXX HR776

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
11 

retary to coordinate this work with the Archivist of the United 

States and to consult with organizations with expertise in civil 

rights, civil liberties, and governmental oversight. 

This section further modifies title II of the Homeland Security 

Act of 2002 to require the Secretary, in administering the policies, 

procedures, and programs required under this section, to (1) create 

standard classified and unclassified formats for Finished Intelligence Products; (2) require the use of the standard unclassified 

format when an unclassified version of classified information would 

be helpful to America’s first preventers; (3) ensure that not only 

the national security but also the privacy and other legal rights of 

United States persons are protected as part of the enforcement of 

the aforementioned policies, procedures, and programs; (4) establish, within one year of enactment, an ongoing auditing mechanism 

administered by the Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector 

General to ensure that, among other things, over-classification prevention policies, procedures, rules and regulations are being followed by all Department employees and contractors; and (5) report 

to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate, and the public, in an appropriate format, on the 

findings of the Department’s Inspector General about whether 

these policies, procedures, rules, and regulations are being followed, identifying any problems in this regard, and recommending 

improvements to address any such problems. 

This section further modifies title II of the Homeland Security 

Act of 2002 to require the Secretary to establish a process to reward Department personnel for successful challenges to classification decisions resulting in the removal of classification markings or 

the downgrading of them. This section requires the Secretary to institute a series of penalties for Department personnel who repeatedly fail to comply with applicable over-classification prevention 

policies, procedures, rules, and regulations after having received 

notice of their non-compliance and appropriate training or re-training to address such noncompliance. 

Section 4. Enforcement of over-classification prevention within the 

Department of Homeland Security 

This section modifies title II of the Homeland Security Act of 

2002 (P.L. 107–296) to require the Secretary of Homeland Security 

to assess technologies available or already in use at the Department of Homeland Security by which an electronic personal identification number or other electronic identifying marker can be assigned to each Department employee or contractor with classification authority in order to track which documents have been classified by a particular employee; identify and address over-classification problems; and assess the information sharing impact of any 

such problems or misuse. This section requires the Secretary to develop an implementation plan for such technology at the Department and to establish a deadline for it. 

This section further modifies title II of the Homeland Security 

Act of 2002 to require the Secretary to (1) develop a training program for the proper use of classification markings for all employees 

and contractors who have classification authority and who are responsible for analysis, dissemination, preparation, producing, reVerDate Aug 31 2005 04:02 Jul 27, 2008 Jkt 069006 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR776.XXX HR776

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
12 

ceiving, publishing, or otherwise communicating written classified 

information; and (2) coordinate with the Archivist of the United 

States in developing this training program. This section clarifies 

that such training (1) must address the proper formats for finished 

intelligence products and the consequences of over-classification 

and other improper uses of classification markings; and (2) serves 

as a prerequisite for obtaining classification authority and renewing such authority annually. 

This section further modifies title II of the Homeland Security 

Act of 2002 to require the Secretary to establish a detailee program 

with the United States National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) that will, among other things, train Department personnel about the policies, procedures, and laws governing original 

classification authorities; bolster NARA’s ability to conduct oversight over the Department; and ensure that Department policies 

are consistent with those established by the Archivist of the United 

States. 

Section 5. Definitions 

This section defines terms used in this measure. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is printed in italic 

and existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in 

roman): 

HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

(a) * * * 

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for this Act is as 

follows: 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE II—INFORMATION ANALYSIS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION 

Subtitle A—Information and Analysis and Infrastructure Protection; Access to 

Information 

* * * * * * * 

Sec. 210F. Over-classification prevention program. 

Sec. 210G. Enforcement of over-classification prevention programs. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE II—INFORMATION ANALYSIS AND 

INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION 

Subtitle A—Information and Analysis and 

Infrastructure Protection; Access to Information 

* * * * * * * 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
13 

SEC. 210F. OVER-CLASSIFICATION PREVENTION PROGRAM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall develop and administer 

policies, procedures, and programs within the Department to prevent the over-classification of homeland security information, terrorism information, weapons of mass destruction information, and 

other information within the scope of the information sharing environment established under section 1016 of the Intelligence Reform 

and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (6 U.S.C. 485) that must be 

disseminated to prevent and to collectively respond to acts of terrorism. The Secretary shall coordinate with the Archivist of the 

United States and consult with representatives of State, local, tribal, and territorial government and law enforcement, organizations 

with expertise in civil rights, civil liberties, and government oversight, and the private sector, as appropriate, to develop such policies, procedures, and programs. 

(b) REQUIREMENTS.—Not later than one year after the date of the 

enactment of the Reducing Over-Classification Act of 2008, the Secretary, in administering the policies, procedures, and programs required under subsection (a), shall—

(1) create, in consultation with the Archivist of the United 

States, standard classified and unclassified formats for finished 

intelligence products created by the Department, consistent with 

any government-wide standards, practices or procedures for 

similar products; 

(2) require that all finished intelligence products created by 

the Department be simultaneously prepared in the standard unclassified format, provided that such an unclassified product 

would reasonably be expected to be of any benefit to a State, 

local, tribal or territorial government, law enforcement agency 

or other emergency response provider, or the private sector, 

based on input provided by the Interagency Threat Assessment 

and Coordination Group Detail established under section 210D; 

(3) ensure that such policies, procedures, and programs protect the national security as well as the information privacy 

rights and legal rights of United States persons pursuant to all 

applicable law and policy, including the privacy guidelines for 

the information sharing environment established pursuant to 

section 1016 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (6 U.S.C. 485), as appropriate; 

(4) establish an ongoing auditing mechanism administered by 

the Inspector General of the Department or other appropriate 

senior Department official that randomly selects, on a periodic 

basis, classified information from each component of the Department that generates finished intelligence products to—

(A) assess, on an individualized basis, whether applicable classification policies, procedures, rules, and regulations have been followed; 

(B) describe any problems with the administration of the 

applicable classification policies, procedures, rules, and regulations, including specific non-compliance issues; 

(C) recommend improvements in awareness and training 

to address them; and 

(D) report at least annually to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
14 

the Senate, and the public, in an appropriate format, on 

the findings of the Inspector General’s audits under this 

section; 

(5) establish a process whereby employees may challenge 

original classification decisions made by Department employees 

or contractors and be rewarded with specific incentives for successful challenges resulting in the removal of classification 

markings or the downgrading of them; 

(6) inform employees and contractors that failure to comply 

with the policies, procedures, and programs established under 

this section could subject them to a series of penalties; and 

(7) institute a series of penalties for employees and contractors who repeatedly fail to comply with the policies, procedures, 

and programs established under this section after having received both notice of their noncompliance and appropriate 

training or re-training to address such noncompliance. 

(c) FINISHED INTELLIGENCE PRODUCT DEFINED.—The term ‘‘finished intelligence product’’ means a document in which an intelligence analyst has evaluated, interpreted, integrated, or placed into 

context raw intelligence or information. 

SEC. 210G. ENFORCEMENT OF OVER-CLASSIFICATION PREVENTION 

PROGRAMS. 

(a) PERSONAL IDENTIFIERS.—The Secretary shall— (1) assess the technologies available or in use at the Department by which an electronic personal identification number or 

other electronic identifying marker can be assigned to each Department employee and contractor with original classification 

authority in order to— (A) track which documents have been classified by a particular employee or contractor; 

(B) determine the circumstances when such documents 

have been shared; 

(C) identify and address over-classification problems, including the misapplication of classification markings to 

documents that do not merit such markings; and 

(D) assess the information sharing impact of any such 

problems or misuse; 

(2) develop an implementation plan for a Department standard for such technology with appropriate benchmarks, a timetable for its completion, and cost estimate for the creation and 

implementation of a system of electronic personal identification 

numbers or other electronic identifying markers for all relevant 

Department employees and contractors; and 

(3) upon completion of the implementation plan described in 

paragraph (2), or not later than 180 days after the date of the 

enactment of the Reducing Over-Classification Act of 2008, 

whichever is earlier, the Secretary shall provide a copy of the 

plan to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 

Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs of the Senate. 

(b) TRAINING.—The Secretary, in coordination with the Archivist 

of the United States, shall—

(1) require annual training for each Department employee 

and contractor with classification authority and who are responsible for analysis, dissemination, preparation, production, 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
15 

receiving, publishing, or otherwise communicating written classified information, including training to— (A) educate each employee and contractor about— (i) the Department’s requirement that all classified 

finished intelligence products that they create be simultaneously prepared in unclassified form in a standard 

format prescribed by the Department, provided that the 

unclassified product would reasonably be expected to 

be of any benefit to a State, local, tribal, or territorial 

government, law enforcement agency, or other emergency response provider, or the private sector, based on 

input provided by the Interagency Threat Assessment 

and Coordination Group Detail established under section 210D; 

(ii) the proper use of classification markings, including portion markings; and 

(iii) the consequences of over-classification and other 

improper uses of classification markings, including the 

misapplication of classification markings to documents 

that do not merit such markings, and of failing to comply with the Department’s policies and procedures established under or pursuant to this section, including 

the negative consequences for the individual’s personnel 

evaluation, homeland security, information sharing, 

and the overall success of the Department’s missions; 

(B) serve as a prerequisite, once completed successfully, 

as evidenced by an appropriate certificate, for— (i) obtaining classification authority; and 

(ii) renewing such authority annually; and 

(C) count as a positive factor, once completed successfully, in the Department’s employment, evaluation, and promotion decisions; and 

(2) ensure that such program is conducted efficiently, in conjunction with any other security, intelligence, or other training 

programs required by the Department to reduce the costs and 

administrative burdens associated with the additional training 

required by this section. 

(c) DETAILEE PROGRAM.—The Secretary shall— (1) implement a Departmental detailee program to detail Departmental personnel to the National Archives and Records Administration for one year, for the purpose of— (A) training and educational benefit for the Department 

personnel assigned so that they may better understand the 

policies, procedures and laws governing original classification authorities; 

(B) bolstering the ability of the National Archives and 

Records Administration to conduct its oversight authorities 

over the Department and other Departments and agencies; 

and 

(C) ensuring that the policies and procedures established 

by the Secretary remain consistent with those established 

by the Archivist of the United States; 

(2) ensure that the program established under paragraph (1) 

includes at least one individual for each Department office with 

delegated original classification authority; and 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
16 

(3) in coordination with the Archivist of the United States, report to Congress not later than 90 days after the conclusion of 

the first year of the program established under paragraph (1), 

on— (A) the advisability of expanding the program on a government-wide basis, whereby other departments and agencies would send detailees to the National Archives and 

Records Administration; and 

(B) the administrative and monetary costs of full compliance with this section. 

(d) SUNSET OF DETAILEE PROGRAM.—Except as otherwise provided by law, subsection (c) shall cease to have effect on December 

31, 2012. 

(e) FINISHED INTELLIGENCE PRODUCT DEFINED.—The term ‘‘finished intelligence product’’ has the meaning given the term in section 210F(c). 

* * * * * * * 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
17 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 22 here HR776.001
18 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 23 here HR776.002
19 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 26 here HR776.006