Main Page

From Jpl Rebadging

(Difference between revisions)
(→External links)
 
(104 intermediate revisions not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
-
== Overview ==
+
----
-
The [[Jet Propulsion Laboratory]] has initiated a new '''JPL rebadging''' process<ref name="newID">The New ID Card at JPL, [http://hspd12.jpl.nasa.gov/TheNewIDCard/ http://hspd12.jpl.nasa.gov/TheNewIDCard/]</ref> for its employees, contractors, and
+
-
affiliates.  After
+
-
negotiating with NASA Headquarters,
+
-
JPL Director [[Charles Elachi]] agreed to the new process, which will produce new ID cards in conformance with
+
-
FIPS 201 ([[Federal Information Processing Standard]]s Publication
+
-
201), a [[United States]] federal government standard that
+
-
specifies Personal Identity Verification ([[PIV]]) requirements for
+
-
Federal employees and contractors.  FIPS 201 is a response to Homeland Security Presidential
+
-
Directive 12 (HSPD-12)<ref name="hspd12">HSPD-12,
+
-
[http://csrc.nist.gov/policies/Presidential-Directive-Hspd-12.html
+
-
HSPD-12, Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12]</ref>.
+
-
The new JPL badging process is controversial, for a variety of reasons (see Controversy section below).  One of the concerns voiced is the lack of respect for privacy
+
[[ATTENTION]]: '''This Page Has Been Superseded By [http://HSPD12JPL.org HSPD12JPL.org]
-
of employees, because the badging procedure requires each employee to answer
+
-
a personal questionnaire, sign a waiver permitting a background
+
-
investigation at any level of detail, have fingerprints taken, and carry a new ID card with the fingerprints readable by
+
-
[[RFID]] technology.  This level of personal intrusion has led to questions that the JPL Honor Code of treating
+
-
employees with dignity and respect is being violated.
+
-
[[JPL]] Badges are identification cards issued to employees, contractors, affiliates,
 
-
and retirees of JPL for
 
-
the purpose of permitting unescorted access to the JPL facility.  They are also used
 
-
for access to controlled areas within the laboratory, and a bar code on it is scanned for
 
-
a variety of routine uses
 
-
such as receiving packages and recording attendance at training sessions.
 
-
JPL management contends that no privacy related information will be stored on the new ID card.<ref name="hspd12"/>
+
If you are looking for information on legal action regarding HSPD 12, please see this page:''' [http://HSPD12JPL.org HSPD12JPL.org]
-
Some employees wonder how JPL management defines "privacy related information", because there is agreement
+
-
that the new ID card will utilize passive [[RFID]] technology to store the following attributes:
+
-
* JPL User Name
+
-
* Electronic IT Certificate
+
-
* Citizenship
+
-
* Personal Identification Number (PIN) Unique to Issuer
+
-
* Two Biometric Fingerprints
+
-
* Facial photo
+
-
An electromagnetic shield would need to cover the new ID card in order to prevent a remote RFID reader from accessing the data
+
-
stored on the new ID card.
+
-
[http://hspd12.jpl.nasa.gov/TheNewIDCard/ Information and a description] of the existing JPL badge and NASA One badge is also available.
+
----
-
== Rebadging process ==
 
-
JPL management has outlined the following steps in order to obtain a new JPL ID card:
 
-
* Employee supplies name, birthday, SSN, and city of birth to JPL, if they have not previously done so
+
Welcome to the fight against JPL's rebadging process.  This wiki contains information about why the $6 million rebadging process is unfair, unethical, and illegal.  Read for yourself about it, and if you agree with us, join our fight against it!
-
* The Office of Protective Servicees sends out email requesting employee to fill out online form
+
-
* Employee fills out form 85 or 85P, as directed, using the online e-QIP system, within 10 days.  This process takes 1-3 hours.
+
-
* Employee prints out release forms, brings them to the security office, and signs in presence of officer
+
-
* JPL Security scans release form, encrypts it, and sends it to the U.S. government.
+
-
* A fresh set of fingerprints are taken (even if they were taken for One NASA badge)
+
-
* A picture is taken (possibly two pictures, one with One NASA Camera, one with new ID card camera)
+
-
* U.S. [[Office of Personnel Management]] performs background investigation
+
-
* If OPM permits it, a badge is issued
+
-
* If adverse information is reported, employee is notified directly by OPM, and has 30 days to adjudicate.  After 30 days, the employee will be barred from accessing the laboratory, and employment will be terminated.
+
-
The process is repeated every 5 years.  Those who have a security clearance are exempt from the process and can
+
For a more current and complete web page on the fight against the use of HSPD-12 to mandate background checks for all in JPL, please visit: http://hspd12jpl.org.
-
immediately acquire their badge.
+
-
== Background Investigations ==
+
This wiki has several pages of related information:
-
=== Risk Assessment ===
+
* [[Main_Page|Main Page]] - The page you are reading, with information about what you can do to help fight the rebadging process
 +
* [[Overview]] - A description the JPL rebadging process and its various steps
 +
* [[Controversy]] - A list of some of the many reasons JPL rebadging process is unfair, unethical, illegal, and anti-JPL
 +
* [[LatestNews|Latest News]] - All the latest news and events, in blog format
 +
* [[Legal|Legal Action]] - Information on legal challenges to the process
 +
* [http://editthis.info/images/jpl_rebadging/2/2e/HSPD12_primer.pdf HSPD-12 Primer] (PDF) - Description on how the directive originated and how the implementation reached JPL
-
Prior to rebadging, each JPL employee will be classified as low, moderate, or high risk.  The low risk personnel will fill out form 85, while moderate and high risk personnel will fill out the more detailed form 85P.  According to Jerry Suitor, tThe classification is based on the job performed, not the individual.  Approximately 97% of the JPL workforce is expected to be classified as low risk, and 3% as high risk.  The classification will be unrelated to the two tiers of sensitivity used in classifying personnel for drug testing.
+
== How you can help fight the JPL rebadging process ==
-
According to Jerry Suitor, a high risk assessment will be made for personnel with access to ATLO, access to spacecraft software without going through a review, or for any position in which damage can be done to a NASA asset.  Section managers are being told of the classification list and can give feedback.
+
=== Inform yourself ===
-
* 4 individuals known to you in last few years
+
'''The best thing you can do is to become informed.'''  You may be shocked when you find out what is really involved, how dangerous it is, and how much of your freedom you are giving up.  To get rebadged, you don't simply provide information on forms-- you provide information that ''begins an investigation of you.''  Did you know:
-
** Questions: adverse health, mental, use of alcohol, drugs, behavior
+
-
** Classification not related to drug risk classification
+
-
=== Form 85 and 85P ===
+
* That SF85 remains in effect for two years, whether or not you stay at JPL? In other words, federal agents can use your SF85 release as permission to investigate you for two full years, even if you are no longer affiliated with a federal agency.
 +
* That you are required to list a neighbor for each current and prior residence, and that these neighbors ''will'' be contacted with a questionnaire about you?
 +
* That the release form on the SF85 or SF85P authorizes an investigator to obtain "any information" on you from schools, residences, employers, criminal establishments, and ''any other sources''?
 +
* That because of the rights you waive, the investigators are explicitly "not limited" in who they can contact about you and what they can ask?
 +
* That you will be asked whether you have taken illegal drugs? That others will be asked whether you [http://editthis.info/images/jpl_rebadging/e/eb/Inv_41_form.pdf abuse drugs/alcohol]?
 +
* That others will be asked whether you are [http://editthis.info/images/jpl_rebadging/e/eb/Inv_41_form.pdf mentally/emotionally stable]?
 +
* That the new rules prevent JPL from issuing retiree badges?
 +
* That the official SF85 and SF85P forms describe the process as "voluntary," but that JPL will ''terminate your employment'' if you don't fill it out?
-
Standard Form 85 or 85P is used as the basis for a background investigation. The official instructions on these do not agree with how JPL management is directing JPL employees and contractors to use them. The following table is a summary of these differences.
+
Of course, if someone should go around goofing off dangerously, there'd be a scandal! a biiiiig juuuuuuuiiiicyy scandal! Remember Lisa Nowak? that what Unca Sam's afraid of. So just be careful, if you're not under SF85. That's all.
-
{| class="wikitable"
+
This is just a sampling of why the process is causing concern.  If these provisions worry you even a little, you may want to read the detailed description of the [[Controversy|controversies]].
-
|-
+
-
! What the Form 85 Instructions say
+
-
! What JPL management says
+
-
|-
+
-
| The information you give us is for the purpose of determining your suitability for federal employment
+
-
| Actually, we're not going to use it for that at all.  The information you give us is for the purpose of determining access to the laboratory.
+
-
|-
+
-
| The form is to be used "only when a conditional offer of employment has been made"
+
-
| Employees and contractors already employed will use this form.
+
-
|-
+
-
| "[F]inal determination on your eligibility for a position will be made by the Office of Personnel Management or the federal agency that requested
+
-
your investigation."
+
-
| Determination on job eligibility was made at the time of employment.  For some employees, this decision was made years or decades ago.
+
-
|-
+
-
| Giving us the information we ask for is voluntary
+
-
| Your employment, regardless of its previous duration, will be terminated if you do not provide the information we ask.
+
-
|}
+
-
   
+
-
Standard Form 85 requests the following information:
+
-
Name,
+
-
Date of Birth,
+
-
Place of Birth,
+
-
Social Security Number,
+
-
Other Names Used,
+
-
Gender,
+
-
Citizenship,
+
-
Where have you lived (past 5 years),
+
-
Degrees you have & Where you went to school,
+
-
Employment History (past 5 years),
+
-
People who know you well (not relatives),
+
-
Military History,
+
-
Selective Service Record (if male born after December 31, 1959),
+
-
Used, possessed, supplied, or manufactured illegal drugs (1 year).
+
-
Authorization for release of information (from schools, residences, employers, and ''other sources'', without limitation to the type of information
+
-
gathered)
+
-
Standard Form 85P requests the following information:
+
<!-- === Sign our online petition ===
-
Police Record (arrests, charges, convictions great than $150),
+
-
Illegal Drugs,
+
-
Alcohol Use,
+
-
Background investigations conducted in the past,
+
-
Financial Record (bankruptcy, debt in arrears more than 180 days),
+
-
Release for information gathering in support of information provided (academic history, employment, criminal history, financial),
+
-
Release for Medical Information
+
-
=== Followup Investigation ===
+
Link to online petition calling for a moratorium on the rebadging process until it can be investigated and changed to align with the privacy laws, California law, JPL honor code.  (e.g., petitiononline.com)
 +
-->
-
Describe graduation verification, employment verification.
+
=== Delay filling out the rebadging form ===
-
Describe medical question, "any reason judgement impaired by a medical reason?"
+
If you have concerns about the "authorization for release of information" you are being asked to sign, ''you do not need to respond to the email requesting you to complete the SF85 or SF85P,'' according to Amanda Beckman-Hezel.  You may delay it until your questions are adequately answered.  A number of these questions are still pending.  For example, some have suggested alternate wording of the release form-- is this OK?  Some have asked what limitations, if any, there are on the investigations?  For example, will medical and financial information be off-limits? If so, you might want to wait until this is verified ''in writing'' by a government lawyer.
-
=== Correcting Adverse Information ===
+
If you decide you need to participate in order to save your job, that is certainly understandable.  We all must make the tough choice.  However, you can still delay your participation until the last possible moment.  You are given "10 days" to respond to the email-- that is an artificial timeline.  JPL actually has 30 days from the time they open your account with OPM to the time they submit your completed package.  After 30 days, there is no explicit penalty, other than JPL has to go through the trouble of "reinitializing" you by opening a new account for you again.
-
Describe similarities to "no fly" list, and difficulty of getting corrections.  Describe similarity of
+
The power of delay is important.  Consider what would happen if even 25% of the lab failed to meet the October 26, 2007 deadline for rebadging.  The deadline might be extended.  It might delay implementation.  In the meantime, court challenges or congressional action may cancel the rebadging.  If we all participate, and participate early, we will all be investigated, with our fingerprints being sent to the FBI's crminal database, and we'll have lost the battle.
-
fixing credit information after identity theft.  Describe difficulty of fixing errors within prescribed 30 day window.
+
-
== FIPS 201 and HSPD 12 ==
+
=== Tell your concerns to your supervisor and others ===
-
Description of new ID card
+
-
'''FIPS 201 ([[Federal Information Processing Standard]]s Publication
+
Tell your concerns to your supervisor, and make him or her ''understand'' them.  Don't use off-topic or vitrolic reasons.  Stick to the facts, and use a reasoned argument.  Refuse to be pressured into signing the paperwork without first having all your pending questions answered.
-
201)''' is a [[United States]] federal government standard that
+
-
specifies Personal Identity Verification ([[PIV]]) requirements for
+
-
Federal employees and contractors.
+
-
In response to HSPD-12<ref name="hspd12"/>, the
+
Talk to others in your group, and get them informed of the issues by pointing them to information resources. Exchange personal email addresses, in order to have discussions of the topic not bound by JPL's Use of Resources policy (e.g., to discuss letters to Congress).  Make rebadging a daily topic, and sneak it into the conversation at every meeting that has new people.  We need to promote awareness, otherwise we risk being sheep led to the slaughter of our freedoms.
-
[[NIST]] Computer Security Division initiated a new program for
+
-
improving the identification and authentication of Federal employees and
+
-
contractors for access to Federal facilities and information systems.
+
-
FIPS 201 was developed to satisfy the technical requirements of HSPD 12,
+
-
approved by the [[Secretary of Commerce]], and issued on February 25,
+
-
2005.
+
-
FIPS 201 together with [[National Institute of Standards and
+
=== Write to your Representative or Senators ===
-
Technology|NIST]] SP 800-78 (Cryptographic Algorithms and Key Sizes for
+
Several employees have written to federal or local government officials to voice their concerns about the HSPD-12 implementation.  Some of those officials are listed below:
-
PIV) are required for U.S. Federal Agencies but do not apply to US
+
-
national security systems.<ref>NIST SP 800-78
+
-
[http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-78/sp800-78-final.pdf
+
-
Cryptographic Algorithms and Key Sizes for Personal Identity
+
-
Verification]</ref>
+
-
The SmartCard Interagency Advisory Board has indicated that to comply
+
Hon. David Dreier, District Office, 2220 East Route 66, Suite 225, Glendora, CA 91740 -- JPL is within his district
-
with FIPS 201 PIV II US government agencies should use [[Smart card]]
+
[http://dreier.house.gov/talkto.htm email form]
-
technology.  <ref>IAB [http://www.smart.gov/iab/ Interagency Advisory
+
-
Board]</ref>
+
-
== Controversy ==
+
Hon. Adam B. Schiff, 87 North Raymond Avenue, Suite 800, Pasadena, CA 91103 -- many JPL employees live within his district
-
The rebadging process is not popular with employees and contractors. There are numerous complaints about it,
+
[http://schiff.house.gov/HoR/CA29/Contact+Information/Contact+Form.htm email form]
-
which are summarized below.
+
-
=== Violation of JPL Honor Code ===
+
If you live in another district, you can find your representative and the correct mailing address at [http://www.house.gov/ House of Representatives].  You will need your Zip Code (including +4 in some cases).
-
Need description of "dignity and respect" provision here, and relationship to badging process.
+
California's Senators can be reached via snail mail or email at the locations below:
-
=== Violation of Federal Law ===
+
Hon. Barbara Boxer, 312 N. Spring Street, Suite 1748, Los Angeles, CA 90012
 +
[http://boxer.senate.gov/contact/email/policy.cfm?CFID=9872602&CFTOKEN=12377993 email form]
-
From Privacy Act 1974 Why you are required to sign a waiver/
+
Hon. Dianne Feinstein, 11111 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 915, Los Angeles, CA 90025
 +
[http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactUs.EmailMe email form]
-
(b) Conditions of disclosure
+
Keep the letters short and to the point, reference previous news stories if possible.  Also note that submitting your request via email tends to expedite the process significantly.  JPL does depend on the efforts of Dreier and Schiff to ensure it's portion of the NASA budget; therefore writing to your representatives will have substantial effects.
 +
Original letters are more convincing and are preferable if you have the time.  You can also use a form letter such as the one provided with "A Recourse to HSPD12".
-
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 pertains, unless disclosure of the record would be--
+
=== Inform Other Government Employees and Contractors ===
-
(1) to those officers and employees of the agency which maintains the record who have a need for the record in the performance of their duties;
+
The HSPD-12/FIPS-201 implementation is not just a JPL or NASA program. It is happening to employees and contractors across all agencies of the government.  You likely know other people who will be affected.  Tell them of your concerns about the process and encourage them to take action, especially in contacting their representatives in the House and Senate.  Point them to this site so they can start getting informed, and be prepared to discuss how this affects them and their colleagues.  Action by Congress is more likely if many members of the House and Senate are hearing from their constituents.
-
(2) required under section 552 of this title;
+
"A recourse to HSPD12" provides an easy way to recruit for new members, with a minimum amount of effort.
-
(3) for a routine use as defined in subsection (a)(7) of this section and described under subsection (e)(4)(D) of this section;
+
=== Ask tough questions and insist on answers ===
-
(4) to the Bureau of the Census for purposes of planning or carrying out a census or survey or related activity pursuant to the provisions of Title 13;
+
=== Advertise this wiki and contribute to it ===
-
(5) to a recipient who has provided the agency with advance adequate written assurance that the record will be used solely as a statistical research or reporting record, and the record is to be transferred in a form that is not individually identifiable;
+
Send the URL of this wiki to your colleagues.  They might thank you!
-
(6) to the National Archives and Records Administration as a record which has sufficient historical or other value to warrant its continued preservation by the United States Government, or for evaluation by the Archivist of the United States or the designee of the Archivist to determine whether the record has such value;
+
Have you ever edited a wiki?  Don't worry, most people haven't.  But it is easy!  Just find listing on the page you feel you can contribute to, and click the "edit" link on the right-hand side.  This will bring you to a web page where you can type in your update.  No web design is needed, no knowledge of HTML.  This is a living document, so have at it!
-
(7) to another agency or to an instrumentality of any governmental jurisdiction within or under the control of the United States for a civil or criminal law enforcement activity if the activity is authorized by law, and if the head of the agency or instrumentality has made a written request to the agency which maintains the record specifying the particular portion desired and the law enforcement activity for which the record is sought;
 
-
(8) to a person pursuant to a showing of compelling circumstances affecting the health or safety of an individual if upon such disclosure notification is transmitted to the last known address of such individual;
+
=== Join the HSPD12JPL list server to share information ===
-
(9) to either House of Congress, or, to the extent of matter within its jurisdiction, any committee or subcommittee thereof, any joint committee of Congress or subcommittee of any such joint committee;
+
Go to [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HSPD12JPL/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HSPD12JPL/] and click on "Join This Group!" or
 +
send an email to Peter Eisenhardt, group moderator, at prme@charter.net to get on the group email list or join the group. Note Peter will be on vacation July 20 - 30, so during that time please sign up at the web site.
-
(10) to the Comptroller General, or any of his authorized representatives, in the course of the performance of the duties of the General Accounting Office;
+
Email sent to HSPD12JPL@yahoogroups.com goes to all members of the list. Replies to such messages will also go to the whole list, so think twice before replying. New members must be approved, so that it doesn't get taken over by spam.
-
(11) pursuant to the order of a court of competent jurisdiction; or
+
To be approved, ask Dennis Byrnes, Bob Nelson, Susan Foster or anyone you know who is already on the group to send an email
 +
vouching for you to one of the list moderators.
-
(12) to a consumer reporting agency in accordance with section 3711(e) of Title 31.
+
=== Contact advocates ===
-
=== Unlimited Waivers ===
+
There are several organizations dedicated to promoting civil liberties, preserving our privacy rights.  Please consider writing to them and pleading our case:
-
Need a description of the waiver and the concerns about it.
+
* [http://www.aclu.org/ American Civil Liberties Union] -- Preserving your right to privacy - freedom from unwarranted government intrusion into your personal and private affairs.
 +
* [http://www.privacyrights.org Privacy Rights Clearinghouse] -- Dedicated to privacy rights, including in the workplace
 +
* [http://www.epic.org/ Electronic Privacy Information Center] -- To protect privacy, the First Amendment, and constitutional values
 +
* [http://www.eff.org Electronic Frontier Foundation] - Defending freedom in the digital world
 +
* [http://www.nocards.org/ Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering] - Protecting consumers from forced use of RFID and data-collection
-
Need a discussion of alternate user-defined waivers.
+
=== Fight the rebadging in court ===
-
=== Fingerprints ===
+
Some people have suggested that they feel like hiring a lawyer. If you do, please share your experiences. A group of like-minded individuals is joining forces and combining resources to explore legal action.
 +
ATTENTION: If you are looking for information on legal action regarding HSPD 12, please see this page: Legal Action http://editthis.info/jpl_rebadging/Legal
-
Need a discussion of fingerprinting, storage by FBI, intermingling with criminal database, etc.
+
An alternate strategy is to fight in the court of public opinion, see below.
-
=== Drug Prosecution ===
+
=== Leave the laboratory ===
-
Need a description of the dangers of answering the drug question.  Investigations to independently confirm information first given here, and then prosecute it.
+
If you decide to leave the laboratory, by either resigning or retiring, and at least part of the reason involves concerns about the rebadging process, you are to be admired for taking strong action!  Do not let your strong action speak for itself, however.  You need to '''document''' that rebadging is the reason you left, otherwise it will have little effect.  Dan McCleese, the JPL chief scientist, understands that there are concerns about the rebadging process, and has asked people to send him ''written'' evidence from people that the rebadging process played a role in their decision to leave the laboratory or decline an offer of employment.  When JPL sees their talent pool draining before their eyes, it can have a big effect.  Verbal information, especially if it is not first-hand, is not going to have an effect.
-
=== Identity Theft ===
+
For those who are leaving, letters to the L.A. Times and Pasadena Star-News may also be effective ways of raising awareness of this issue.  In fact, this is more effective than hiring lawyers; institutions, particularly universities, will avoid bad publicity at all costs -- and will be more responsive as a result.
-
Need a description of previously mishandled sensitive information
+
=== File a FOIA request to see your investigation data ===
-
=== Abuse of Information ===
+
You normally would not have access to the information that the investigation found about you.  However, you may request a copy of your investigation file under provisions of the Privacy Act. For an investigation request, write to OPM-IS, FOIP, Post Office Box 618, Boyers, PA 16018-0618. You must include your full name, Social Security Number, date and place of birth, and you must sign your request.  Call OPM's Federal Investigations Processing Center, Freedom of Information / Privacy Act Services, at 724-794-5612 if you have any questions.
-
Some excerpts from the NAC check handbook that you may find usefull.
+
Everyone should do this, for a couple of reasons.  First, just as with a credit report, you want to be sure that the information gathered about you is correct.  If it is not correct, you want to insist that it be corrected, and verify that it is corrected.  This is serious.  You don't want to accidentally get on a no-fly list when your name has been confused with a terrorist (this has actually happened).
-
Clean Criminal Record Does Not Mean
+
Secondly, you want to insist that the government operate transparently. It is shameful that a FOIA request is necessary to get this information.  Compare this with credit reports-- credit agencies are required to share your credit information with you, but with the rebadging investigation, which has ''much more personal'' information, the subject must go through a more difficult process.  Until the law changes, we need to press the issue by forcing them to deal with as many FOIA requests as possible.
-
Absence of Criminal Behavior
+
-
Checks of criminal records identify only the tip of the iceberg of criminal activity. A clean record indicates only that there are no records of criminal conduct in the places checked. The absence of information in criminal record files should not be viewed as positive evidence of reliability or trustworthiness.
+
-
Most crimes are not reported to the police. Most reported crimes do not lead to arrest, and many arrested persons are not prosecuted and convicted. Even for those who are prosecuted and convicted, the criminal records are often incomplete or missing. As a result, the chances are very small that an individual who has committed a single crime, even a serious crime, will have a criminal record. The more crimes a person has committed, the greater the odds of that person having a record. See Prevalence of Crime for a discussion of the percentage of the population that has a criminal record.
+
== Status of Rebadging Battles ==
-
Much past criminal behavior is likely to be discovered only by self-admission, interviews with references or developed sources, or polygraph examination. This behavior should be evaluated under the adjudication guidelines even though there may be no criminal record.
+
* Awareness campaign
 +
* Congressional notification
 +
* Court fights against HSPD 12
 +
* Congressional action
 +
** Adam Schiff position: "There is no question that [the lab] and other space centers play a vital role in maintaining our national security. At the same time, we must be vigilant here, as elsewhere, to ensure that whatever personal information is obtained from those who work at our science centers is necessary to maintain security and used for only that purpose."
 +
** David Dreier position: "Mr. Dreier wants to ensure the privacy of [lab] employees is protected."
-
Many Arrested Persons
+
"Our office has heard from JPL employees and Congressman Dreier shares their concerns regarding personal privacy," said Alisa Do, Dreier's legislative director.
-
Are Not Prosecuted or Convicted
+
-
For each 100 persons arrested by the police on felony charges, about 45 are typically released due to insufficient evidence or legal technicalities unrelated to guilt or innocence. About 55 are prosecuted, with one acquitted and 54 convicted.  
+
-
To avoid the cost and uncertainties of a trial, more than half the prosecuted cases are plea-bargained down to conviction for a misdemeanor rather than a felony, which generally involves far less serious consequences for the defendant. Only about 32 of every 100 persons arrested on felony charges actually spend any time in a correctional institution. Ref 13
+
** Holt
 +
* Department of Commerce action
 +
* Permission to use modified release form
-
Records of cases that are dismissed without prosecution or that are plea-bargained may be incomplete or misleading. When evaluating criminal conduct, the individual's behavior is the primary consideration, not whether the individual was prosecuted or convicted. If there is good reason to believe the person committed a felony but plea-bargained down to a misdemeanor, it counts as a felony.  
+
Jerry Suitor had the action, with support of the Caltech General Counsel's Office, to draft sample language for any employee concerned with the vagueness of Form 85, to explicitly exclude the items from Form 85P (such as credit check, medical records, etc.) which an employee could insert on their signed Form 85 release as exceptions.  Ironically, including this language this could actually trigger a ''deeper'' check.
-
Conditions that call into question a persons reliability, trustworthiness or judgment include:
+
Jerry Suitor is now away from the lab, and Amanda Beckman-Hezel is in his place.  Verbal information from her indicates that no language will be allowed, but we will update this space when written information is available.
-
A single serious crime, regardless of whether the person was arrested or convicted for that crime. A "serious" crime is often defined as a felony, as distinct from a misdemeanor or ordinance violation. Conviction, admission, or strong evidence of a felony will usually support a recommendation for disapproval unless there are unusual mitigating circumstances. If there is good reason to believe the person committed a felony, but the crime was plea-bargained down to a misdemeanor, it counts as a felony. Which crimes are considered felonies varies from one state to another and changes over time. The following actions may be considered a serious crime or breach of trust even if they are not categorized as a felony:
+
* Meaning of release form
-
(1) Any crime punishable by confinement for one year or more.
+
-
(2) Any crime involving the use of force, coercion or intimidation; violence against persons; or the use of firearms or explosives;
+
Amanda Beckman-Hezel has been asked whether the "other sources of information" clause on the SF85 release is sufficient to allow an investigator to access financial or medical records if he or she deemed it necessary to do so.  Beckman-Hezel indicated that she thought California law requires an explicit permission in order to access medical records, and that this form is not explicit permission for medical records.  She has been making inquiries and expects to have a more definitive answer during the week of June 4, 2007.
-
(3) A violation of parole or probation.
+
(Doesn't Federal Law take precedence over State Law in cases like this?)
-
(4) Any criminal or civil offense involving breach of trust or fiduciary duty, including embezzlement, bribery, insurance fraud, or falsification of documents or statements for personal gain of more than $500.
+
Note, according to the [http://www.opm.gov Office of Personnel Management], the agency that conducts background investigations, "a search of the records of commercial credit reporting agencies is an integral part of almost all background investigations."  This, despite the fact that credit agencies are ''not'' mentioned in the SF85 release form's laundry list of sources they check.
-
(5) Obstruction or corruption of government functions or deprivation of civil rights.
+
* Charles Elachi, JPL Director, position
-
Two or more lesser crimes or civil offenses that indicate a pattern of illegal or irresponsible behavior, regardless of whether the person was arrested or convicted for any of these offenses. A violation of parole or probation suggests a possible pattern of criminal behavior. Multiple offenses indicate intentional, continuing behavior that raises serious questions about the person’s trustworthiness, reliability, and judgment. A pattern of disregard for the law is more significant than the monetary value or penalty ascribed to a given crime. See Pattern of Dishonest, Unreliable, or Rule-Breaking Behavior under the Personal Conduct guideline.
+
At all hands meetings, Charles Elachi has described the rebadging process as not a big deal, and that he had no problem with it. He understands that people at JPL are concerned, but that the only question that gave him pause was the drug question. He says that he has been assured that as long as you are honest, there won't be a problem, even if you answer that you have taken illegal drugs.
-
A close and continuing voluntary association with persons known to be involved in criminal activities. Association with family members is generally considered non-voluntary in this context.  
+
-
Sources of Additional Information
+
* Gene Tattini, JPL Deputy Director, position
-
The Department of Justice maintains the Bureau of Justice Statistics Clearinghouse, which is a central location for ordering a wide variety of studies and reports dealing with the criminal justice system. Reports are sent free of charge. The address is P.O. Box 179, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701-0179. Phone: 800-732-3277. Fax: 410-792-4358. The Internet address, which has lists of publications, is http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/.
+
-
For data on drugs and crime, information is available from the Drugs & Crime Data Center & Clearinghouse, 1600 Research Blvd., Rockville, MD 20850. Phone: 800-666-3332. Most reports are free.
+
General Tattini has stated that the successful completion of the rebadging process is critical to the operation of the laboratory.
-
The FBI's annual Uniform Crime Reports may be purchased from the Government Printing Office.
+
* Mike Griffin, NASA Administrator, position
-
=== Coercion ===
+
Griffin feels he must obey the HSPD 12 implementation, because it is an executive order with the force of law.  His lawyer tells him it is legal.  He also views the implementation as "measured and appropriate" and supports it personally.  He is sorry some feel otherwise, but if they don't comply, they will  not be allowed to access a federal facility.  The only recourse, he says, is to file suit.  Judging by how often he mentions it, he seems to feel that his personal decision to have a background check when he was 18 is relevant to the question of forcing all federal employees to do the same.
-
Describe loss of job in relation to "voluntary" procedure.
+
== Hall of shame ==
-
We will need to let JPL help to understand the meaning of the word "voluntary"
+
A number of important people at JPL and NASA have said some things that turned out to be false.  Here we set the record straight.
-
vol·un·tar·y      /ˈvɒlənˌtɛri/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[vol-uhn-ter-ee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation adjective, noun, plural -tar·ies.
+
* "The new ID card will not hold any personal or privacy related information"
-
–adjective 1. done, made, brought about, undertaken, etc., of one's own accord or by free choice: a voluntary contribution. 
+
-
2. of, pertaining to, or acting in accord with the will: voluntary cooperation. 
+
-
3. of, pertaining to, or depending on voluntary action: voluntary hospitals. 
+
-
4. Law. a. acting or done without compulsion or obligation. 
+
-
b. done by intention, and not by accident: voluntary manslaughter. 
+
-
c. made without valuable consideration: a voluntary settlement. 
+
-
+
-
5. Physiology. subject to or controlled by the will. 
+
-
6. having the power of willing or choosing: a voluntary agent. 
+
-
7. proceeding from a natural impulse; spontaneous: voluntary laughter. 
+
-
–noun 8. something done voluntarily. 
+
-
9. a piece of music, frequently spontaneous and improvised, performed as a prelude to a larger work, esp. a piece of organ music performed before, during, or after an office of the church. 
+
 +
The new ID card holds, among other things, the facial photo, citizenship, and ''fingerprints'' of the holder.  It's hard to get more personal than that.  Also, it's not just "held" on the card-- the card uses passive RFID technology, which means that the encrypted data on the ID card can be read remotely without the card-holder's permission, or even his knowledge, unless he magnetically shields the ID card.  But since the data is encrypted, the person who manages to access the card would need the encryption keys to decipher the data.  Therefore, even if they do access it, the data is completely useless to them.
-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
* "The rebadging forms are no worse than what you'd go through for a home loan, well, except for the drug question."
-
[Origin: 1350–1400; ME < L voluntārius, equiv. to volunt(ās) willingness, inclination (ult. repr. a formation with -tās -ty2 on the prp. of velle to want, wish; see will1, -ent) + -ārius -ary]
+
In reality, home loans generally require a credit check, along with things such as proof of income, and bank balances. They are limited to the purpose at hand, namely, determining qualification for a loan.  In contrast, the rebadging process goes well beyond the purpose HSPD-12 calls for, namely, proper identification (making sure you are who you say you are). Verifying identity does not require--- and neither does a home loan application--- an intrusive ''background investigation'' to determine loyalty to the U.S., fingerprinting, selective service record, references from previous neighbors and supervisors, etc., and it does not require the subject to sign a broad waiver of all their privacy rights to unnamed investigators who may ask whoever they want whatever they want.  But this type of background check is exactly what JPLers are being required to submit to.
-
=== Relationship to California Law ===
+
* "If they came back for further information on anyone who has filled out Form 85, we will push back as that is unreasonable."
-
This the current law
+
Once a rebadging package is sent to OPM, JPL and Caltech don't know ''what'' is being asked for, or who is being contacted for information.  If an investigator decides that someone's financial or medical information is relevant and started pursuing it, JPL would not be able to push back.  JPL/Caltech is not even notified during the adjudication phase, according to Jerry Suitor.
-
1050. Any person, or agent or officer thereof, who, after having
+
* "There's a lot of confusion. What we need to do is a better job of educating our employees and contractor employees about what this entails," NASA spokesman Michael Braukus said. "We're not asking for financial data or personal data. That's just been some miscommunication; that's what we need to correct." (Quote from the May 18, 2007 Pasadena Star News front page article).  
-
discharged an employee from the service of such person or after an
+
-
employee has voluntarily left such service, by any misrepresentation
+
-
prevents or attempts to prevent the former employee from obtaining
+
-
employment, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
+
 +
We are still waiting for NASA to clarify that the highly personal and intrusive SF85 or SF85P forms are not needed as we have been told all along.  If they are required, and assuming the press is correctly quoting Braukus, the only ethical recourse for him is to issue a retraction explaining that they are, in fact, asking for personal data.
 +
I, Dennis Byrnes, quoted in the same article, e-mailed Mr. Braukus, first on the afternoon of May 18 with copies to NASA Administrator Griffin, Dep. Adm. Shana Dale, NASA HQ HSDP-12 Project manager Walter Hussey, Shari Feinberg a lawyer in the NASA OGC and Jerry Suitor, JPL HSPD-12 manager. I asked for a retraction, he did not answer. On May 22, I e-mailed him again adding to the previous list his boss and his boss' boss as well as Amanda Hezel, who has now replaced Jerry Suitor. I also copied the Pasadena Star News reporter. Two days later he responded saying he was sorry for the delay that "it was difficult to find any free time." And, "the reporter misquoted me." His e-mail was to me alone with no apparent cc's. The reporter, Elise Kleeman told me that, "she quoted him verbatim. I have my notes from my telephone interview."
-
1051.  Except as provided in Section 1057, any person or agent or
+
* In the July 2007 JPL Universe (Volume 37, Number 7), Tattini is quoted as saying "All the release form does is to ask permission to verify the entries you've made.  It does not give the investigating agency the right to go into your medical records or financial records, unless they come back and specifically ask for your permission.  Under no circumstances could this process be used to open your mail or tap your telephones."
-
officer thereof, who requires, as a condition precedent to securing
+
-
or retaining employment, that an employee or applicant for employment
+
-
be photographed or fingerprinted by any person who desires his or
+
-
her photograph or fingerprints for the purpose of furnishing the same
+
-
or information concerning the same or concerning the employee or
+
-
applicant for employment to any other employer or third person, and
+
-
these photographs and fingerprints could be used to the detriment of
+
-
the employee or applicant for employment is guilty of a misdemeanor.
+
 +
Unfortunately, Mr. Tattini is mistaken:  the form does NOT state that it is limited to "just verifying the entries you have made".  If that were the case, then it would seem that it would be very simple just to modify the form to have it specifically state that (and many of us would probably then find it acceptable).  But we are specifically *prohibited* from making any modifications to the form.  You can access the form using the links at the bottom of this page to see for yourself what it really says.  In fact, the wording of the form is such that access to ANY information from ANY source is explicitly *authorized* if you sign it (i.e., your medical or financial information, your personal e-mail and telephone records, or even client-priviledged legal information, since by signing this you are explicitly waiving "any previous agreement to the contrary").  Note, too, that despite claims that California law requires a court order to access your medical records, Federal law generally trumps state law...
 +
== JPL Rebadging in the News==
 +
JPL has not officially responded to the complaints on the new process.  It has posted a
 +
[http://hspd12.jpl.nasa.gov/ public website] to describe the process and provide employees and the
 +
public with official information on the new ID card.  The controversy is not reported on the official site.
-
1052.  Any person who knowingly causes, suffers, or permits an
+
The media has published a number of articles on the controversy:
-
agent, superintendent, manager, or employee in his employ to commit a
+
-
violation of sections 1050 and 1051, or who fails to take all
+
-
reasonable steps within his power to prevent such violation is guilty
+
-
of a misdemeanor.
+
 +
* [http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/search/ci_5980638 JPL fray over screenings heats up], Elise Kleeman, Pasadena Star News, May 25, 2007.
 +
* [http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_5924148 JPL scientists balk at background checks], Elise Kleeman, Pasadena Star News, May 18, 2007.
 +
* [http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0507/050707tdpm1.htm NASA employees object to data-gathering actions], Aliya Sternstein, National Journal's Technology Daily, May 7, 2007, as appearing in Government Executive (govexec.com).
 +
* [http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=24134 Internal NASA JPL Memo Regarding Privacy Issues Associated with the Implementation of HSPD#12], SpaceRef.com, May 7, 2007.
 +
* [http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2007/05/federal_id_plan_threatens_priv.html Federal ID Plan Threatens Privacy, Say JPL Scientists], Secrecy News, May 3, 2007.
 +
*[http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=3251012 NASA Contractors Raise Concerns About Looming Security Checks]. Associated Press, June 6, 2007
 +
<!-- Need to reference/link to other stories here.  Pasadena Free Press, Boston Globe, NASAwatch, etc. -->
 +
== Other HSPD-12 Related Badging Opposition ==
 +
These background investigations and intrusions on privacy are not just occuring at JPL and NASA.  The implementation of HSPD-12 is a government-wide program that covers all government employees, all government contractors and subcontractors who require "long term" access to government facilities, and potentially anyone who accesses government computer systems. 
-
1053.  Nothing in this chapter shall prevent an employer or an
+
Other organizations are also opposing the PIV-II badge requirements:
-
agent, employee, superintendent or manager thereof from furnishing,
+
-
upon special request therefor, a truthful statement concerning the
+
-
reason for the discharge of an employee or why an employee
+
-
voluntarily left the service of the employer.  If such statement
+
-
furnishes any mark, sign, or other means conveying information
+
-
different from that expressed by words therein, such fact, or the
+
-
fact that such statement or other means of furnishing information was
+
-
given without a special request therefor is prima facie evidence of
+
-
a violation of sections 1050 to 1053.
+
 +
[http://employeeclearance.com/index.html Employeeclearance.com ] Contractors to the US Department of Education
-
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=lab&codebody=
+
Resistance to HSPD from within apparently was successful in DOE labs. "Under some interpretations of the standard, the system could halt many of the unclassified scientific missions underway at the National Laboratories.", a consortium of CIOs of DOE labs stated in [http://csrc.nist.gov/piv-program/FIPS201-Public-Comments/Argonne-National-Laboratory2.pdf  public opposition to FIPS-201].
-
=== Loss of Talent ===
+
LNBL, in [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/hspd12/15.pdf response to the draft guideliene for HSPD-12 implementation], called for exempting FFRDCs from the policy.
-
 
+
-
Describe potential loss of personnel.  Give examples from the press.
+
-
 
+
-
=== Required Verbiage ===
+
-
 
+
-
Insert direction from Homeland Security about the required language to describe the process.
+
-
 
+
-
== Political Action ==
+
-
Insert text of Nelson letter, other letters, Holt's letter to Commerce Secretary.
+
-
 
+
-
List relevant congressional representatives and local officials. Provide sample letter and/or link to a stand-alone document.
+
-
 
+
-
Link to online petition calling for a moratorium on the rebadging process until it can be investigated and changed to align with the privacy laws, California law, JPL honor code.  (e.g., petitiononline.com)
+
-
 
+
-
== JPL Rebadging in the News==
+
-
 
+
-
JPL has not officially responded to the complaints on the new process.  It has posted a
+
-
[[http://hspd12.jpl.nasa.gov/ public website]] to describe the process and provide employees and the
+
-
public with official information on the new ID card.  The controversy is not reported on this site.
+
-
Need to reference/link to other stories here. Pasadena Free Press, Boston Globe, NASAwatch, etc.
+
Currently, Lawrence Berkeley National Lab [http://www.lbl.gov/CIO/PIV/ PIV project page] states:
-
==References==
+
"On October 14th, 2005, The Deputy Secretary of Energy signed a memo approving a new interpreatation of PIV which allows uncleared Laboratory employees and facilities to issue current access credentials instead of the PIV Identity Credentials. This effectively exempts nearly all Lab facilities and employees/guests from the PIV requirements."
-
<references />
+
-
==See also==
+
Similar status is reported by [http://www.fnal.gov/faw/badges/ Fermilab].
-
*[[Common Access Card| U.S. Department of Defense Common Access Card
+
-
(CAC)]]
+
-
==External links==
+
-
This list needs to be updated. Here are HSPD-12 related links only:
+
-
* [http://csrc.nist.gov/piv-program/index.html PIV Information ]
+
== Reference Documents ==
-
* [http://csrc.nist.gov/npivp/ PIV News]
+
* [http://editthis.info/jpl_rebadging/Image:DOC_Response.pdf Response from NIST to Congressman Holt's letter of May 21], indicates that NIST thinks the standard they wrote for personal identity verification does not require suitability checks.
-
* [http://govtsecurity.com/mag/plan_ahead_maximize/index.html Plan ahead
+
* [http://editthis.info/images/jpl_rebadging/a/a9/Holt_Ehlers.pdf Letter to Congressmen Holt and Ehlers], April 26, 2007, from JPL employees Robert M. Nelson, Dennis L. Matson, Kevin  H. Baines, and Timothy J. Parker.
-
* to maximize benefits to HSPD-12 investment]
+
* [http://editthis.info/images/jpl_rebadging/c/c8/20070521_RH_on_HSPD-12.pdf Letter to Commerce Secretary Gutierrez], May 21, 2007, from Congressman Holt, requesting a meeting to address the changes necessary to the implementation of HSPD 12.
-
* [http://www.smartcard.gov/information/FSCPMmarch2005/TonyCieri.pdf PIV
+
* [http://wunderland.com/WTS/Ginohn/cetera/HSPD-12/HSPD-12jpl1.html RE: NASA Implementation of Homeland Security Presidential Directive #12 (HSPD-12)], Letter to Congressman Dreier, from Dennis Byrnes, Apr/May, 2007.
-
* Supporting Documents ]
+
* [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/homefront/ Spying on the Home Front], Frontline, 2007.
-
* [http://www.smartcard.gov/information/FSCPMmarch2005/JohnMoore.pdf
+
* [http://wunderland.com/WTS/Ginohn/cetera/HSPD-12/HSPD-12.html My Problems with HSPD-12], John Cooper (GSFC contractor), April-May, 2007.
-
* Federal Identity Management and Smart Cards ]
+
* [http://editthis.info/images/jpl_rebadging/6/62/Sf85.pdf Standard Form 85], Questionnaire for Non-Sensitive Positions.
-
* [http://www.cio.gov/ficc/cpl.htm Shared Service Providers ]
+
* [http://editthis.info/images/jpl_rebadging/9/9d/Sf85p.pdf Standard Form 85P], Questionnaire for Public Trust Positions.
-
* [http://www.fips201.com FIPS201.com, a source of comparative
+
* [http://editthis.info/images/jpl_rebadging/e/eb/Inv_41_form.pdf OPM INV 41 (partial)], Questionnaire portion of the ivestigation forms forwarded by OMP to applicant's supervisor(s).
-
* information for GSA-approved FIPS 201 products]
+
* [http://editthis.info/images/jpl_rebadging/e/ec/Opm_form_inv_42.pdf OPM INV 42], sent by OPM to applicant's personal references and neighbors.
-
* The Privacy Act of 1974 http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/privstat.htm
+
* [http://www.opm.gov/extra/investigate/QABackground.asp  GENERAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT OPM BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS], U.S. Office of Personnel Management, May 22, 2002.
 +
* [http://www.opm.gov/forms/ OPM Forms]
 +
* [http://www.opm.gov/extra/investigate/IS-15.pdf Requesting OPM Federal Investigations], a guide for agencies requesting background investigations from OPM, May 2001.
 +
* [http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07368.pdf GAO Report on FBI information security] A report on major weaknesses in the FBI's protection of information.
 +
* [http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06178.pdf GAO Report on implementation of HSPD-12] NASA had some flexibility in implementation, and could have made separate rules for JPL (see page 32)
 +
* [http://www.nasa.gov/privacy/PIA_NASA_Security_Records_System.html NASA Privacy Impact Assessment] This appears to be the privacy impact assessment that NASA produced as part of its HSPD-12 implementation.
 +
* [http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/e6-13009.htm NASA Privacy Act Notice] Describes categories and sources of the information collected.
 +
* [http://editthis.info/JPL_rebadging/Image:Sf85releaseImproved.pdf Improved "Authorization for Release of Information"] An unofficial revised version of the SF85 release form.  This attempts to fix some of the problems with the official one.
 +
* [http://www.osec.doc.gov/osy/HSPD12/PDF/PIA%20for%20PIV-1%20-%20Final.pdf Dept of Commerce Privacy Impact Assessment], Explains the background-check process and what information is contained on the "smart card".
 +
* [http://editthis.info/images/jpl_rebadging/a/ab/Suitability_Matrix_mods.pdf OPM suitability adjudication guidelines]. This document, rather incredibly, was described as recent by JPL.
 +
--
 +
rv

Current revision as of 06:53, 28 November 2007

ATTENTION: This Page Has Been Superseded By HSPD12JPL.org


If you are looking for information on legal action regarding HSPD 12, please see this page: HSPD12JPL.org


Welcome to the fight against JPL's rebadging process. This wiki contains information about why the $6 million rebadging process is unfair, unethical, and illegal. Read for yourself about it, and if you agree with us, join our fight against it!

For a more current and complete web page on the fight against the use of HSPD-12 to mandate background checks for all in JPL, please visit: http://hspd12jpl.org.

This wiki has several pages of related information:

  • Main Page - The page you are reading, with information about what you can do to help fight the rebadging process
  • Overview - A description the JPL rebadging process and its various steps
  • Controversy - A list of some of the many reasons JPL rebadging process is unfair, unethical, illegal, and anti-JPL
  • Latest News - All the latest news and events, in blog format
  • Legal Action - Information on legal challenges to the process
  • HSPD-12 Primer (PDF) - Description on how the directive originated and how the implementation reached JPL

Contents

How you can help fight the JPL rebadging process

Inform yourself

The best thing you can do is to become informed. You may be shocked when you find out what is really involved, how dangerous it is, and how much of your freedom you are giving up. To get rebadged, you don't simply provide information on forms-- you provide information that begins an investigation of you. Did you know:

  • That SF85 remains in effect for two years, whether or not you stay at JPL? In other words, federal agents can use your SF85 release as permission to investigate you for two full years, even if you are no longer affiliated with a federal agency.
  • That you are required to list a neighbor for each current and prior residence, and that these neighbors will be contacted with a questionnaire about you?
  • That the release form on the SF85 or SF85P authorizes an investigator to obtain "any information" on you from schools, residences, employers, criminal establishments, and any other sources?
  • That because of the rights you waive, the investigators are explicitly "not limited" in who they can contact about you and what they can ask?
  • That you will be asked whether you have taken illegal drugs? That others will be asked whether you abuse drugs/alcohol?
  • That others will be asked whether you are mentally/emotionally stable?
  • That the new rules prevent JPL from issuing retiree badges?
  • That the official SF85 and SF85P forms describe the process as "voluntary," but that JPL will terminate your employment if you don't fill it out?

Of course, if someone should go around goofing off dangerously, there'd be a scandal! a biiiiig juuuuuuuiiiicyy scandal! Remember Lisa Nowak? that what Unca Sam's afraid of. So just be careful, if you're not under SF85. That's all.

This is just a sampling of why the process is causing concern. If these provisions worry you even a little, you may want to read the detailed description of the controversies.


Delay filling out the rebadging form

If you have concerns about the "authorization for release of information" you are being asked to sign, you do not need to respond to the email requesting you to complete the SF85 or SF85P, according to Amanda Beckman-Hezel. You may delay it until your questions are adequately answered. A number of these questions are still pending. For example, some have suggested alternate wording of the release form-- is this OK? Some have asked what limitations, if any, there are on the investigations? For example, will medical and financial information be off-limits? If so, you might want to wait until this is verified in writing by a government lawyer.

If you decide you need to participate in order to save your job, that is certainly understandable. We all must make the tough choice. However, you can still delay your participation until the last possible moment. You are given "10 days" to respond to the email-- that is an artificial timeline. JPL actually has 30 days from the time they open your account with OPM to the time they submit your completed package. After 30 days, there is no explicit penalty, other than JPL has to go through the trouble of "reinitializing" you by opening a new account for you again.

The power of delay is important. Consider what would happen if even 25% of the lab failed to meet the October 26, 2007 deadline for rebadging. The deadline might be extended. It might delay implementation. In the meantime, court challenges or congressional action may cancel the rebadging. If we all participate, and participate early, we will all be investigated, with our fingerprints being sent to the FBI's crminal database, and we'll have lost the battle.

Tell your concerns to your supervisor and others

Tell your concerns to your supervisor, and make him or her understand them. Don't use off-topic or vitrolic reasons. Stick to the facts, and use a reasoned argument. Refuse to be pressured into signing the paperwork without first having all your pending questions answered.

Talk to others in your group, and get them informed of the issues by pointing them to information resources. Exchange personal email addresses, in order to have discussions of the topic not bound by JPL's Use of Resources policy (e.g., to discuss letters to Congress). Make rebadging a daily topic, and sneak it into the conversation at every meeting that has new people. We need to promote awareness, otherwise we risk being sheep led to the slaughter of our freedoms.

Write to your Representative or Senators

Several employees have written to federal or local government officials to voice their concerns about the HSPD-12 implementation. Some of those officials are listed below:

Hon. David Dreier, District Office, 2220 East Route 66, Suite 225, Glendora, CA 91740 -- JPL is within his district email form

Hon. Adam B. Schiff, 87 North Raymond Avenue, Suite 800, Pasadena, CA 91103 -- many JPL employees live within his district email form

If you live in another district, you can find your representative and the correct mailing address at House of Representatives. You will need your Zip Code (including +4 in some cases).

California's Senators can be reached via snail mail or email at the locations below:

Hon. Barbara Boxer, 312 N. Spring Street, Suite 1748, Los Angeles, CA 90012 email form

Hon. Dianne Feinstein, 11111 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 915, Los Angeles, CA 90025 email form

Keep the letters short and to the point, reference previous news stories if possible. Also note that submitting your request via email tends to expedite the process significantly. JPL does depend on the efforts of Dreier and Schiff to ensure it's portion of the NASA budget; therefore writing to your representatives will have substantial effects.

Original letters are more convincing and are preferable if you have the time. You can also use a form letter such as the one provided with "A Recourse to HSPD12".

Inform Other Government Employees and Contractors

The HSPD-12/FIPS-201 implementation is not just a JPL or NASA program. It is happening to employees and contractors across all agencies of the government. You likely know other people who will be affected. Tell them of your concerns about the process and encourage them to take action, especially in contacting their representatives in the House and Senate. Point them to this site so they can start getting informed, and be prepared to discuss how this affects them and their colleagues. Action by Congress is more likely if many members of the House and Senate are hearing from their constituents.

"A recourse to HSPD12" provides an easy way to recruit for new members, with a minimum amount of effort.

Ask tough questions and insist on answers

Advertise this wiki and contribute to it

Send the URL of this wiki to your colleagues. They might thank you!

Have you ever edited a wiki? Don't worry, most people haven't. But it is easy! Just find listing on the page you feel you can contribute to, and click the "edit" link on the right-hand side. This will bring you to a web page where you can type in your update. No web design is needed, no knowledge of HTML. This is a living document, so have at it!


Join the HSPD12JPL list server to share information

Go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HSPD12JPL/ and click on "Join This Group!" or send an email to Peter Eisenhardt, group moderator, at prme@charter.net to get on the group email list or join the group. Note Peter will be on vacation July 20 - 30, so during that time please sign up at the web site.

Email sent to HSPD12JPL@yahoogroups.com goes to all members of the list. Replies to such messages will also go to the whole list, so think twice before replying. New members must be approved, so that it doesn't get taken over by spam.

To be approved, ask Dennis Byrnes, Bob Nelson, Susan Foster or anyone you know who is already on the group to send an email vouching for you to one of the list moderators.

Contact advocates

There are several organizations dedicated to promoting civil liberties, preserving our privacy rights. Please consider writing to them and pleading our case:

Fight the rebadging in court

Some people have suggested that they feel like hiring a lawyer. If you do, please share your experiences. A group of like-minded individuals is joining forces and combining resources to explore legal action. ATTENTION: If you are looking for information on legal action regarding HSPD 12, please see this page: Legal Action http://editthis.info/jpl_rebadging/Legal

An alternate strategy is to fight in the court of public opinion, see below.

Leave the laboratory

If you decide to leave the laboratory, by either resigning or retiring, and at least part of the reason involves concerns about the rebadging process, you are to be admired for taking strong action! Do not let your strong action speak for itself, however. You need to document that rebadging is the reason you left, otherwise it will have little effect. Dan McCleese, the JPL chief scientist, understands that there are concerns about the rebadging process, and has asked people to send him written evidence from people that the rebadging process played a role in their decision to leave the laboratory or decline an offer of employment. When JPL sees their talent pool draining before their eyes, it can have a big effect. Verbal information, especially if it is not first-hand, is not going to have an effect.

For those who are leaving, letters to the L.A. Times and Pasadena Star-News may also be effective ways of raising awareness of this issue. In fact, this is more effective than hiring lawyers; institutions, particularly universities, will avoid bad publicity at all costs -- and will be more responsive as a result.

File a FOIA request to see your investigation data

You normally would not have access to the information that the investigation found about you. However, you may request a copy of your investigation file under provisions of the Privacy Act. For an investigation request, write to OPM-IS, FOIP, Post Office Box 618, Boyers, PA 16018-0618. You must include your full name, Social Security Number, date and place of birth, and you must sign your request. Call OPM's Federal Investigations Processing Center, Freedom of Information / Privacy Act Services, at 724-794-5612 if you have any questions.

Everyone should do this, for a couple of reasons. First, just as with a credit report, you want to be sure that the information gathered about you is correct. If it is not correct, you want to insist that it be corrected, and verify that it is corrected. This is serious. You don't want to accidentally get on a no-fly list when your name has been confused with a terrorist (this has actually happened).

Secondly, you want to insist that the government operate transparently. It is shameful that a FOIA request is necessary to get this information. Compare this with credit reports-- credit agencies are required to share your credit information with you, but with the rebadging investigation, which has much more personal information, the subject must go through a more difficult process. Until the law changes, we need to press the issue by forcing them to deal with as many FOIA requests as possible.

Status of Rebadging Battles

  • Awareness campaign
  • Congressional notification
  • Court fights against HSPD 12
  • Congressional action
    • Adam Schiff position: "There is no question that [the lab] and other space centers play a vital role in maintaining our national security. At the same time, we must be vigilant here, as elsewhere, to ensure that whatever personal information is obtained from those who work at our science centers is necessary to maintain security and used for only that purpose."
    • David Dreier position: "Mr. Dreier wants to ensure the privacy of [lab] employees is protected."

"Our office has heard from JPL employees and Congressman Dreier shares their concerns regarding personal privacy," said Alisa Do, Dreier's legislative director.

    • Holt
  • Department of Commerce action
  • Permission to use modified release form

Jerry Suitor had the action, with support of the Caltech General Counsel's Office, to draft sample language for any employee concerned with the vagueness of Form 85, to explicitly exclude the items from Form 85P (such as credit check, medical records, etc.) which an employee could insert on their signed Form 85 release as exceptions. Ironically, including this language this could actually trigger a deeper check.

Jerry Suitor is now away from the lab, and Amanda Beckman-Hezel is in his place. Verbal information from her indicates that no language will be allowed, but we will update this space when written information is available.

  • Meaning of release form

Amanda Beckman-Hezel has been asked whether the "other sources of information" clause on the SF85 release is sufficient to allow an investigator to access financial or medical records if he or she deemed it necessary to do so. Beckman-Hezel indicated that she thought California law requires an explicit permission in order to access medical records, and that this form is not explicit permission for medical records. She has been making inquiries and expects to have a more definitive answer during the week of June 4, 2007.

(Doesn't Federal Law take precedence over State Law in cases like this?)

Note, according to the Office of Personnel Management, the agency that conducts background investigations, "a search of the records of commercial credit reporting agencies is an integral part of almost all background investigations." This, despite the fact that credit agencies are not mentioned in the SF85 release form's laundry list of sources they check.

  • Charles Elachi, JPL Director, position

At all hands meetings, Charles Elachi has described the rebadging process as not a big deal, and that he had no problem with it. He understands that people at JPL are concerned, but that the only question that gave him pause was the drug question. He says that he has been assured that as long as you are honest, there won't be a problem, even if you answer that you have taken illegal drugs.

  • Gene Tattini, JPL Deputy Director, position

General Tattini has stated that the successful completion of the rebadging process is critical to the operation of the laboratory.

  • Mike Griffin, NASA Administrator, position

Griffin feels he must obey the HSPD 12 implementation, because it is an executive order with the force of law. His lawyer tells him it is legal. He also views the implementation as "measured and appropriate" and supports it personally. He is sorry some feel otherwise, but if they don't comply, they will not be allowed to access a federal facility. The only recourse, he says, is to file suit. Judging by how often he mentions it, he seems to feel that his personal decision to have a background check when he was 18 is relevant to the question of forcing all federal employees to do the same.

Hall of shame

A number of important people at JPL and NASA have said some things that turned out to be false. Here we set the record straight.

  • "The new ID card will not hold any personal or privacy related information"

The new ID card holds, among other things, the facial photo, citizenship, and fingerprints of the holder. It's hard to get more personal than that. Also, it's not just "held" on the card-- the card uses passive RFID technology, which means that the encrypted data on the ID card can be read remotely without the card-holder's permission, or even his knowledge, unless he magnetically shields the ID card. But since the data is encrypted, the person who manages to access the card would need the encryption keys to decipher the data. Therefore, even if they do access it, the data is completely useless to them.

  • "The rebadging forms are no worse than what you'd go through for a home loan, well, except for the drug question."

In reality, home loans generally require a credit check, along with things such as proof of income, and bank balances. They are limited to the purpose at hand, namely, determining qualification for a loan. In contrast, the rebadging process goes well beyond the purpose HSPD-12 calls for, namely, proper identification (making sure you are who you say you are). Verifying identity does not require--- and neither does a home loan application--- an intrusive background investigation to determine loyalty to the U.S., fingerprinting, selective service record, references from previous neighbors and supervisors, etc., and it does not require the subject to sign a broad waiver of all their privacy rights to unnamed investigators who may ask whoever they want whatever they want. But this type of background check is exactly what JPLers are being required to submit to.

  • "If they came back for further information on anyone who has filled out Form 85, we will push back as that is unreasonable."

Once a rebadging package is sent to OPM, JPL and Caltech don't know what is being asked for, or who is being contacted for information. If an investigator decides that someone's financial or medical information is relevant and started pursuing it, JPL would not be able to push back. JPL/Caltech is not even notified during the adjudication phase, according to Jerry Suitor.

  • "There's a lot of confusion. What we need to do is a better job of educating our employees and contractor employees about what this entails," NASA spokesman Michael Braukus said. "We're not asking for financial data or personal data. That's just been some miscommunication; that's what we need to correct." (Quote from the May 18, 2007 Pasadena Star News front page article).

We are still waiting for NASA to clarify that the highly personal and intrusive SF85 or SF85P forms are not needed as we have been told all along. If they are required, and assuming the press is correctly quoting Braukus, the only ethical recourse for him is to issue a retraction explaining that they are, in fact, asking for personal data.

I, Dennis Byrnes, quoted in the same article, e-mailed Mr. Braukus, first on the afternoon of May 18 with copies to NASA Administrator Griffin, Dep. Adm. Shana Dale, NASA HQ HSDP-12 Project manager Walter Hussey, Shari Feinberg a lawyer in the NASA OGC and Jerry Suitor, JPL HSPD-12 manager. I asked for a retraction, he did not answer. On May 22, I e-mailed him again adding to the previous list his boss and his boss' boss as well as Amanda Hezel, who has now replaced Jerry Suitor. I also copied the Pasadena Star News reporter. Two days later he responded saying he was sorry for the delay that "it was difficult to find any free time." And, "the reporter misquoted me." His e-mail was to me alone with no apparent cc's. The reporter, Elise Kleeman told me that, "she quoted him verbatim. I have my notes from my telephone interview."

  • In the July 2007 JPL Universe (Volume 37, Number 7), Tattini is quoted as saying "All the release form does is to ask permission to verify the entries you've made. It does not give the investigating agency the right to go into your medical records or financial records, unless they come back and specifically ask for your permission. Under no circumstances could this process be used to open your mail or tap your telephones."

Unfortunately, Mr. Tattini is mistaken: the form does NOT state that it is limited to "just verifying the entries you have made". If that were the case, then it would seem that it would be very simple just to modify the form to have it specifically state that (and many of us would probably then find it acceptable). But we are specifically *prohibited* from making any modifications to the form. You can access the form using the links at the bottom of this page to see for yourself what it really says. In fact, the wording of the form is such that access to ANY information from ANY source is explicitly *authorized* if you sign it (i.e., your medical or financial information, your personal e-mail and telephone records, or even client-priviledged legal information, since by signing this you are explicitly waiving "any previous agreement to the contrary"). Note, too, that despite claims that California law requires a court order to access your medical records, Federal law generally trumps state law...

JPL Rebadging in the News

JPL has not officially responded to the complaints on the new process. It has posted a public website to describe the process and provide employees and the public with official information on the new ID card. The controversy is not reported on the official site.

The media has published a number of articles on the controversy:

Other HSPD-12 Related Badging Opposition

These background investigations and intrusions on privacy are not just occuring at JPL and NASA. The implementation of HSPD-12 is a government-wide program that covers all government employees, all government contractors and subcontractors who require "long term" access to government facilities, and potentially anyone who accesses government computer systems.

Other organizations are also opposing the PIV-II badge requirements:

Employeeclearance.com Contractors to the US Department of Education

Resistance to HSPD from within apparently was successful in DOE labs. "Under some interpretations of the standard, the system could halt many of the unclassified scientific missions underway at the National Laboratories.", a consortium of CIOs of DOE labs stated in public opposition to FIPS-201.

LNBL, in response to the draft guideliene for HSPD-12 implementation, called for exempting FFRDCs from the policy.

Currently, Lawrence Berkeley National Lab PIV project page states:

"On October 14th, 2005, The Deputy Secretary of Energy signed a memo approving a new interpreatation of PIV which allows uncleared Laboratory employees and facilities to issue current access credentials instead of the PIV Identity Credentials. This effectively exempts nearly all Lab facilities and employees/guests from the PIV requirements."

Similar status is reported by Fermilab.

Reference Documents

-- rv

Retrieved from "http://editthis.info/jpl_rebadging/Main_Page"
Personal tools