U.S. Releases Secret List of Nuclear Sites Accidentally

NYT ^ | June 2, 2009 | WILLIAM J. BROAD

[balls]

The federal government mistakenly made public a 266-page report, its pages marked “highly confidential,” that gives detailed information about hundreds of the nation’s civilian nuclear sites and programs, including maps showing the precise locations of stockpiles of fuel for nuclear weapons.

The publication of the document was revealed Monday in an on-line newsletter devoted to issues of federal secrecy. That publicity set off a debate among nuclear experts about what dangers, if any, the disclosures posed. It also prompted a flurry of investigations in Washington into why the document was made public.

On Tuesday evening, after inquiries from The New York Times, the document was withdrawn from a Government Printing Office Web site.

...

President Obama sent the document to Congress on May 5 for Congressional review and possible revision, and the Government Printing Office subsequently posted the draft declaration on its web site.

[Madame Dufarge]

As of Tuesday evening, the reasons for that action remained a mystery. On its cover, the document attributes its publication to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. But Lynne Weil, the committee spokeswoman, said the committee had “neither published it nor had control over its publication.”

Keith Ellison (Muslim - Minnesota)is a member of this committee.

Tin foil hat off.

[katiekins1]

That’s A$$-hat in Chief to YOU, buster! ;^)

: )

[concerned about politics]

The federal government mistakenly made public a 266-page report, its pages marked “highly confidential,” that gives detailed information about hundreds of the nation’s civilian nuclear sites and programs, including maps showing the precise locations of stockpiles of fuel for nuclear weapons.

Oh please. Oboma has yet to do anything that SUPPORTS the United States. It's almost as if his goal for the next 4 years is to destroy it.

Sorry, but I don't believe this was ....opps....an accident.

If it harms America, it has Oboma written all over it.

[NoGrayZone]

Mistake??? Crap, we’re going to get hit very soon.

[Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!]

Odumbo did it on purpose.

[satan]

“Highly Confidential Safeguards Sensitive”

Don’t forget UCNI

[freebird5850]

He works and worships for the King whose ring he kisses. It’s all coming out. He’s probably got copies to drop off at all his muzzie parties he’s going to. We’re going to find Barry out, impeach him and deport him. He will next be heard from on a tape saying how he infiltrated America, stole secrets and gave them to the terrorists.

[ctdonath2]

The document, signed by Obama, states the United States regards this information as ‘‘Sensitive but Unclassified.’’

[mvpel]

Don’t forget UCNI

I guess that's a DOE, not a DOD classification, right?

Unclassified Controlled Nuclear Information

[bustinchops]

I wonder if it was deliberate. With this administration’s hatred of America and Marxist proclivities, it seems more likely than not that it was a deliberate move.

[bustinchops]

The only ones who can stop it are we the people.

[mvpel]

§ 1017.29 Civil penalty.
top

(a) Regulations. Any person who violates a UCNI security requirement of any of the following is subject to a civil penalty under this part:

(1) 10 CFR Part 1017—Identification and Protection of Unclassified Controlled Nuclear Information; or

(2) Any other DOE regulation related to the safeguarding or security of UCNI if the regulation provides that violation of its provisions may result in a civil penalty pursuant to section 148 of the Act.

(b) Compliance order. If, without violating a requirement of any regulation issued under section 148, a person by an act or omission causes, or creates a risk of, the loss, compromise or unauthorized disclosure of UCNI, the Secretary may issue a compliance order to that person requiring the person to take corrective action and notifying the person that violation of the compliance order is subject to a notice of violation and assessment of a civil penalty. If a person wishes to contest the compliance order, the person must file a notice of appeal with the Secretary within 15 days of receipt of the compliance order.

(c) Amount of penalty. The Director may propose imposition of a civil penalty for violation of a requirement of a regulation under paragraph (a) of this section or a compliance order issued under paragraph (b) of this section, not to exceed $100,000 for each violation.

.....

§ 1017.30 Criminal penalty

Any person who violates section 148 of the Atomic Energy Act or any regulation or order of the Secretary issued under section 148 of the Atomic Energy Act, including these regulations, may be subject to a criminal penalty under section 223 of the Atomic Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2273). In such case, the Secretary shall refer the matter to the Attorney General for investigation and possible prosecution.

---

A knowing and willful violation is what invokes the criminal penalties - a two-year felony on the first offense, and five years on the second offense - but the civil penalty does not require willfulness. Simple incompetence is enough.

[DBrow]

The document is not secret, not classified, not confidential. it’s open government literature, that you could pull at a Fed depositary library.

It has “Secrets” like the fact that the Westinghouse reactor research lab has a reactor.

This is an engineered kerfuffle over nothing, a time-waster, or a distraction. It could also be that the fedgov is shouting loudly that the stuff was “released” to set the stage for some follow-on event (like accidentally giving a supercomputer to the Chinese, then leaking that it was loaded with nuclear simulation codes, buit not to worry, the validation files were missing, then Los Alamos announces the theft of the validation files. By then the story was “old news” and the press had “moved on”).

The “highly confidential safeguards sensitive” looks like an IAEA designation but the whole document is not marked up like an actual US classified document.

During the co-presidency O’Leary declassified literally tons of former nuclear secrets because the co-presidents wanted to level the playing field (and China wanted the Peacekeeper warhead design). Looks like a repeat play. What will go this time? Earth-penetrating neutron bombs with no daycode? A helium-3 bomb with no fission trigger?

[DBrow]

I think it’s IAEA.

[DrC]

From p. 1 of the pdf link posted:
“The IAEA classification of the enclosed declaration is ‘‘Highly Confidential Safeguards Sensitive’’; however, the United States regards this information as ‘‘Sensitive but Unclassified.’’

Nonetheless, under Public Law 109–401, information reported to, or otherwise acquired by, the United States Government under this title or under the U.S.-IAEA Additional Protocol shall be exempt from disclosure under section 552 of title 5, United States Code.”

So “highly confidential” is an IAEA classification. Technically, the material WAS NOT classified according to US standards (as a previous poster stated 100 comments ago). But I don’t know the meaning of the last paragraph above. Does “exempt from disclosure” mean that it’s OK or NOT OK to publish the material? The fact that GPO pulled it after NYT inquired suggests somebody goofed, but this looks like a bureaucratic snafu rather than WH-orchestrated leak.

The title page states: MESSAGE FROM
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
TRANSMITTING
A LIST OF THE SITES, LOCATIONS, FACILITIES, AND ACTIVITIES
IN THE UNITED STATES DECLARED TO THE INTERNATIONAL
ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY (IAEA), UNDER THE PROTOCOL ADDITIONAL
TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA AND THE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY
FOR THE APPLICATION OF SAFEGUARDS IN THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA, WITH ANNEXES, AS REQUIRED BY SECTION
271 OF PUBLIC LAW 109–401

MAY 6, 2009.—Message and accompanying papers referred to the
Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed

I think transmittals of this sort are routinely printed (indeed the authorizing statute may require this). The 109th Congress was in session from 2005-2006, so my guess is that this list has been issued annually ever since. Whether it’s been openly printed in the past is another matter.

[DrC]

FWIW, Sec. 171 of PL 109-401 states:
“Not later than 60 days before submitting the initial United
States declaration to the IAEA under the Additional Protocol, the President shall submit to Congress a list of the sites, locations,facilities, and activities in the United States that the President intends to declare to the IAEA, and a report thereon.”
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ401.109.pdf

[penelopesire]

For the love of god!! Everyday it gets worse! What’s next? Giving the US nuclear arsenal to Iran and Cuba? At this point, would anyone be surprised?

[texas booster]

The information, considered confidential but not classified, was assembled for transmission later this year to the International Atomic Energy Agency as part of a process by which the United States is opening itself up to stricter inspections in hopes that foreign countries, especially Iran and others believed to be clandestinely developing nuclear arms, will do likewise.

President Obama sent the document to Congress on May 5 for Congressional review and possible revision, and the Government Printing Office subsequently posted the draft declaration on its Web site.

Between Congress and the IAEA, there is no way that this document wasn't going to be forwarded to foreign governments and militaries around the world anyway.

[DrC]

FWIW, Section 552 of Title 5 relates to public disclosure.
http://uscode.house.gov/uscode-cgi/fastweb.exe?getdoc+uscview+t05t08+26+0++()%20%20AND%20((5)%20ADJ%20USC)%3ACITE%20AND%20(USC%20w%2F10%20(552))%3ACITE
If the above link doesn’t work, search here:
http://uscode.house.gov/search/criteria.shtml

Thus, I interpret the “exemption” to mean that this material is exempt from FOIA requests (presumably due to IAEA’s sensitivity about its classification). But Section 552 is lengthy, so I freely concede this interpretation may be in error.

[Centurion2000]

bump for later