Pages

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Typhoon Bopha



I am thinking about sailing from Langkawi to Seattle this year. The departure window to get past the typhoons in this part of the world is May 2013.

The weather window for the North Pacific is also rather limited.

I need to sail from Langkawi to Japan in May + June 2013 and then from Japan to Seattle in July + August 2013.

It's about 8,000 miles requiring about 80 days at sea in 120 days.

Rather intimidating.

Monday, July 23, 2012

Left Fork Cutler Creek Trail

Olaf came in at the crack of dawn with plans for an early hike. There is a monsoon airflow over us right now and it's leading to convective rain in the afternoons starting at about 1:30pm. That limits the hiking time to mornings only – and needing early starts.

I quickly packed – filling the water bottles and making sure everything else I might need was still in my pack. I'd left the Platypus full of water and it seems to have leached some of the plastic flavor out. I'll have to keep trying.

I then had a quick breakfast and we were out the door a little after 7am. The next discussion was about where to go. First suggestion was up Black Bear Creek and then down Engineer Pass – but that seemed like a bit more than could be done in a morning. We thought about just going up and down Black Bear Creek, but Olaf had been there the day before.

So we came up with the trails near Dexter Creek … which we didn't quite know since we'd forgotten a map. I remembered there were several starting from the same trail head that went up radiating up valleys with a trail connecting them along the ridgeline. But this wasn't the most popular of locations, so the trails might have been only on the maps and not on the ground. The Ouray Hiking Group tends to claim some trails which are not 100% actual.

We drove past the Dexter Creek turn and out to the end of the road for the Subaru. We were above the houses in the canyon just outside of Ouray. When you get up it's always amazing how many houses are out in the bush. Everyone wants their 5 acres with a view.

We walked up the road for about 1.7 miles and came to the actual trailhead to Cutler Creek. When we went up the trail to the sign-in box where there was a map so we could see what we wanted to attempt. We could head up any of the valleys, and once at the top walk along the ridge to the north until we came to the next choice which would allow us to return. It the trails actually existed.

The Cutler Creek trail started like a real trail. Clear dirt to walk on. Our first choice was to turn onto the Okeson Trail. But it didn't seem to exist. There was a meadow with no track across it, nor any sign of something leading into the trees on the far side. So we stuck to the Cutler Creek - which then split into the Cutler Creek proper and the Left Fork.

We took the Left Fork, since it went up, and it seemed a little more like a trail. Both were rather grassy and narrow.

The trail was rather nice, following a small stream on the cool shady side of the valley. We then discovered a gully that was about 4ft deep beside the trail which had recently been full of water – the grass on the sides was still flattened. A little father on there was another channel which had covered the trail with dirt and rocks – and then we came to the third channel which had buried about 75 ft of trail under mud and rocks.

There had been a bit of a flash flood in the area, probably on the Saturday two days earlier. The lower main river hadn't shown any signs of the flood – but some of the higher really showed signs of the moving water.

And then we got into the hail zone. Lots of Aspen leaves down and pine branch tips covering the trail. Some of the gullies still had piles of hail in them. It made us remember our plans to be back by 1:30pm. Getting wet and cold is one thing – dealing with flash floods is another.

We were getting near to the top when we came to a steep meadow with no trail across it. there were some posts and cairns going straight up, so we followed them to the far side and then stumbled upon the trail again.

Some more up, and then we were on the ridge … but still in the trees, so there wasn't much to see. The trail to the north was rather thin, and we didn't have time for exploring. We decided to go south on the stronger ridgeline trail and then turn around and go back the way we'd come.

We found a view point that allowed us to look at Courthouse Mt. - the walk of two days ago. All you see from almost all angles in the cliffs that make the halls of the shape. The almost 45deg slope of the triangle on top of the cliffs reflects climb on the trail up the back – and average of 18% gradient, with the top third 28%.

After the look it was time to retract our steps. Going down the trail didn't look anything like it did going up. As the seasons change the trails also become completely different experiences.

We got back to the car just as the rain and thunder and lightening arrived. The walk was 10 miles up and down. It started at 8,229 and rose 2,640 ft to 10,869. It took us about 5.5 hrs with no stops, since we were back by late lunchtime.



Left Fork Cutler Creek Trail



Flash-flood damage



Courthouse Mt view at the top of the trail

Friday, July 13, 2012

Branding the virtual me

I am slowly cleaning up my 'brand' – i.e. my virtual life. Amazon now has my three books – The Binding Returned, The World Revealed, and The Goddess Reborn in their paperback and Kindle editions all mentioning each other and showing up on my Author Page. I just have to get my Author Page to reflect me – 'Jeffrey Morrow Miller', and not all the other 'Jeffrey Miller' people who write, or have backgrounds in ecological research very similar to mine.

And then there is the famous 'Jeffrey Miller' who was shot at Kent State on May 4, 1970.

Tuesday, July 10, 2012

The Books Of Time



The Binding Returned
Volume 1 of 4 of DOOR, the first of The Five Books Of Time




The World Revealed
Volume 2 of 4 of DOOR, the first of The Five Books Of Time



The Goddess Reborn
Volume 3 of 4 of DOOR, the first of The Five Books Of Time


Thursday, June 7, 2012

Failed to load the packagelist in ubunutu 12.04

For no apparent reason Ubuntu decided to no longer update itself. This has happened before and I needed to kill the package list and get a fresh version.

I found the following advice and it worked:


Press Ctrl+Alt+T to open a terminal and use this

sudo rm /var/lib/apt/lists/* -vf
sudo apt-get update

should take care of it

Tuesday, May 29, 2012

US Senator Michael Bennet states his position on Indefinite Detention

Dear Jeffrey:


Thank you for contacting me regarding the provisions addressing detainee matters in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012, S. 1867. I appreciate hearing from you.


As you may know, the Senate recently debated several NDAA provisions addressing detainee matters. One provision, Section 1031 of the bill, attempts to codify the President’s authority to detain members of al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States. As requested by the Obama Administration, Section 1031 contains a provision explicitly clarifying that it does not expand the President’s existing authority to detain. A second provision, Section 1032, requires military custody of al-Qaeda members who attack or make plans to attack the United States. It is important to point out that, under this provision, the Executive Branch has the flexibility to keep a covered detainee in civilian custody, pursuant to a national security determination, or to transfer a military detainee for trial in the civilian courts. The bill also includes provisions relating to the transfer of detainees held at Guantanamo Bay.


Many had concerns that the detainee provisions in the NDAA amounted to a major shift in U.S. policy. Some news reports characterized the provisions of the bill as potentially allowing the indefinite detention of any U.S. citizen for any reason. Let me clearly state that the bill does not authorize any such action. In fact, by codifying the specific authority of the President, Congress has reengaged on a very important national security issue and attempted to clarify what the President can and cannot do. This is a noteworthy departure from prior post-9/11 Congress which have not come to consensus on a detainee legal framework.


Nevertheless, I am concerned that the detainee provisions could raise questions regarding the process by which the Administration detains and prosecutes members of al-Qaeda who attempt to attack the U.S. For example, we must ensure that the military custody provisions do not hamper the Administration’s ability to prosecute a detainee in civilian courts if it determines that this is the most appropriate venue.


Senator Mark Udall from Colorado offered an amendment to the NDAA that would have removed the underlying provisions addressing detainee matters. Instead, it would have required full participation from the Administration and the Senate Armed Services, Judiciary, and Intelligence committees prior to legislation codifying detainee policies. Due to my concerns with the provisions, I supported Senator Udall’s amendment. Unfortunately, it was defeated by a vote of 38 to 60.


I also supported an amendment introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein of California to clarify that Section 1031 does not affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of U.S. citizens, lawful resident aliens of the U.S., or any other persons who are captured in the United States. Senator Feinstein’s amendment passed handily.


Given the complexity and importance of this issue, and the heated rhetoric and confusion about the actual wording of the detainee provisions, I invite you to read them for yourself. You can find them at page 426 of S. 1867, which you can access here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:SN01867:|/home/LegislativeData.php.


The overall bill, including the language of Senator Feinstein’s amendment, makes it abundantly clear that the detainee provisions do not affect existing law relating to the detention of U.S. citizens. In addition, I plan to work with the Administration to ensure that it has the flexibility to prosecute detainees in the most effective ways possible. In the end, I voted yes on the overall bill, which sets annual pay for our troops and provides the tools that keep them safe. The NDAA passed the Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support (93 to 7) and must now be reconciled with the House version of the NDAA.


I value the input of fellow Coloradans in considering the wide variety of important issues and legislative initiatives that come before the Senate. I hope you will continue to inform me of your thoughts and concerns.


For more information about my priorities as a U.S. Senator, I invite you to visit my website at http://bennet.senate.gov/. Again, thank you for contacting me.


Sincerely,

Michael Bennet
United States Senator

Sunday, April 8, 2012

unimplemented function msvcp90.dll in wine

The best thing about Ubuntu is that you can do the right thing – and accept the regular updates … and suddenly find your system no longer works.

WINE improved itself a couple of days ago – and Kindle for PC no longer worked.

The problem seemed to be an unimplemented function msvcp90.dll.

The solution seemed to be given at WineHQ as a fix for a game that also needs the dll.

Down under xlive.dll FIX the following advice helped:

What to do:

Download msvcp90.dll from - ­HERE


Extract the DLL file and copy them into your C:/windows/system32 folder of wine (overwriting any file that may already be there)

Open winecfg

Set msvcp90.dll to native

Also set msvcr90.dll to builtin


I also cleaned all the 'manifest' files out of

.wine/drive_c/windows/winsxs/manifests

which don't seem to add much. Advice Here

Simply removing the *.maifest files didn't get Kindle running as was recommended.

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

NATIONAL DEFENSE RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
March 16, 2012
Executive Order -- National Defense Resources Preparedness

EXECUTIVE ORDER

NATIONAL DEFENSE RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (50 U.S.C. App. 2061 et seq.), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows:

PART I - PURPOSE, POLICY, AND IMPLEMENTATION

Section 101. Purpose. This order delegates authorities and addresses national defense resource policies and programs under the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (the "Act").

Sec. 102. Policy. The United States must have an industrial and technological base capable of meeting national defense requirements and capable of contributing to the technological superiority of its national defense equipment in peacetime and in times of national emergency. The domestic industrial and technological base is the foundation for national defense preparedness. The authorities provided in the Act shall be used to strengthen this base and to ensure it is capable of responding to the national defense needs of the United States.

Sec. 103. General Functions. Executive departments and agencies (agencies) responsible for plans and programs relating to national defense (as defined in section 801(j) of this order), or for resources and services needed to support such plans and programs, shall:

(a) identify requirements for the full spectrum of emergencies, including essential military and civilian demand;

(b) assess on an ongoing basis the capability of the domestic industrial and technological base to satisfy requirements in peacetime and times of national emergency, specifically evaluating the availability of the most critical resource and production sources, including subcontractors and suppliers, materials, skilled labor, and professional and technical personnel;

(c) be prepared, in the event of a potential threat to the security of the United States, to take actions necessary to ensure the availability of adequate resources and production capability, including services and critical technology, for national defense requirements;

(d) improve the efficiency and responsiveness of the domestic industrial base to support national defense requirements; and

(e) foster cooperation between the defense and commercial sectors for research and development and for acquisition of materials, services, components, and equipment to enhance industrial base efficiency and responsiveness.

Sec. 104. Implementation. (a) The National Security Council and Homeland Security Council, in conjunction with the National Economic Council, shall serve as the integrated policymaking forum for consideration and formulation of national defense resource preparedness policy and shall make recommendations to the President on the use of authorities under the Act.

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall:

(1) advise the President on issues of national defense resource preparedness and on the use of the authorities and functions delegated by this order;

(2) provide for the central coordination of the plans and programs incident to authorities and functions delegated under this order, and provide guidance to agencies assigned functions under this order, developed in consultation with such agencies; and

(3) report to the President periodically concerning all program activities conducted pursuant to this order.

(c) The Defense Production Act Committee, described in section 701 of this order, shall:

(1) in a manner consistent with section 2(b) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2062(b), advise the President through the Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, and the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy on the effective use of the authorities under the Act; and

(2) prepare and coordinate an annual report to the Congress pursuant to section 722(d) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2171(d).

(d) The Secretary of Commerce, in cooperation with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and other agencies, shall:

(1) analyze potential effects of national emergencies on actual production capability, taking into account the entire production system, including shortages of resources, and develop recommended preparedness measures to strengthen capabilities for production increases in national emergencies; and

(2) perform industry analyses to assess capabilities of the industrial base to support the national defense, and develop policy recommendations to improve the international competitiveness of specific domestic industries and their abilities to meet national defense program needs.

PART II - PRIORITIES AND ALLOCATIONS

Sec. 201. Priorities and Allocations Authorities. (a) The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071, to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:

(1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;

(2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;

(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;

(4) the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;

(5) the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and

(6) the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.

(b) The Secretary of each agency delegated authority under subsection (a) of this section (resource departments) shall plan for and issue regulations to prioritize and allocate resources and establish standards and procedures by which the authority shall be used to promote the national defense, under both emergency and non-emergency conditions. Each Secretary shall authorize the heads of other agencies, as appropriate, to place priority ratings on contracts and orders for materials, services, and facilities needed in support of programs approved under section 202 of this order.

(c) Each resource department shall act, as necessary and appropriate, upon requests for special priorities assistance, as defined by section 801(l) of this order, in a time frame consistent with the urgency of the need at hand. In situations where there are competing program requirements for limited resources, the resource department shall consult with the Secretary who made the required determination under section 202 of this order. Such Secretary shall coordinate with and identify for the resource department which program requirements to prioritize on the basis of operational urgency. In situations involving more than one Secretary making such a required determination under section 202 of this order, the Secretaries shall coordinate with and identify for the resource department which program requirements should receive priority on the basis of operational urgency.

(d) If agreement cannot be reached between two such Secretaries, then the issue shall be referred to the President through the Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor and the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism.

(e) The Secretary of each resource department, when necessary, shall make the finding required under section 101(b) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071(b). This finding shall be submitted for the President's approval through the Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor and the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism. Upon such approval, the Secretary of the resource department that made the finding may use the authority of section 101(a) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071(a), to control the general distribution of any material (including applicable services) in the civilian market.

Sec. 202. Determinations. Except as provided in section 201(e) of this order, the authority delegated by section 201 of this order may be used only to support programs that have been determined in writing as necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense:

(a) by the Secretary of Defense with respect to military production and construction, military assistance to foreign nations, military use of civil transportation, stockpiles managed by the Department of Defense, space, and directly related activities;

(b) by the Secretary of Energy with respect to energy production and construction, distribution and use, and directly related activities; and

(c) by the Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to all other national defense programs, including civil defense and continuity of Government.

Sec. 203. Maximizing Domestic Energy Supplies. The authorities of the President under section 101(c)(1) (2) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071(c)(1) (2), are delegated to the Secretary of Commerce, with the exception that the authority to make findings that materials (including equipment), services, and facilities are critical and essential, as described in section 101(c)(2)(A) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071(c)(2)(A), is delegated to the Secretary of Energy.

Sec. 204. Chemical and Biological Warfare. The authority of the President conferred by section 104(b) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2074(b), is delegated to the Secretary of Defense. This authority may not be further delegated by the Secretary.

PART III - EXPANSION OF PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY AND SUPPLY

Sec. 301. Loan Guarantees. (a) To reduce current or projected shortfalls of resources, critical technology items, or materials essential for the national defense, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense, as defined in section 801(h) of this order, is authorized pursuant to section 301 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2091, to guarantee loans by private institutions.

(b) Each guaranteeing agency is designated and authorized to: (1) act as fiscal agent in the making of its own guarantee contracts and in otherwise carrying out the purposes of section 301 of the Act; and (2) contract with any Federal Reserve Bank to assist the agency in serving as fiscal agent.

(c) Terms and conditions of guarantees under this authority shall be determined in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The guaranteeing agency is authorized, following such consultation, to prescribe: (1) either specifically or by maximum limits or otherwise, rates of interest, guarantee and commitment fees, and other charges which may be made in connection with such guarantee contracts; and (2) regulations governing the forms and procedures (which shall be uniform to the extent practicable) to be utilized in connection therewith.

Sec. 302. Loans. To reduce current or projected shortfalls of resources, critical technology items, or materials essential for the national defense, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 302 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2092, to make loans thereunder. Terms and conditions of loans under this authority shall be determined in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of OMB.

Sec. 303. Additional Authorities. (a) To create, maintain, protect, expand, or restore domestic industrial base capabilities essential for the national defense, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 303 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093, to make provision for purchases of, or commitments to purchase, an industrial resource or a critical technology item for Government use or resale, and to make provision for the development of production capabilities, and for the increased use of emerging technologies in security program applications, and to enable rapid transition of emerging technologies.

(b) Materials acquired under section 303 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093, that exceed the needs of the programs under the Act may be transferred to the National Defense Stockpile, if, in the judgment of the Secretary of Defense as the National Defense Stockpile Manager, such transfers are in the public interest.

Sec. 304. Subsidy Payments. To ensure the supply of raw or nonprocessed materials from high cost sources, or to ensure maximum production or supply in any area at stable prices of any materials in light of a temporary increase in transportation cost, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 303(c) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093(c), to make subsidy payments, after consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of OMB.

Sec. 305. Determinations and Findings. (a) Pursuant to budget authority provided by an appropriations act in advance for credit assistance under section 301 or 302 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2091, 2092, and consistent with the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, as amended (FCRA), 2 U.S.C. 661 et seq., the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority to make the determinations set forth in sections 301(a)(2) and 302(b)(2) of the Act, in consultation with the Secretary making the required determination under section 202 of this order; provided, that such determinations shall be made after due consideration of the provisions of OMB Circular A 129 and the credit subsidy score for the relevant loan or loan guarantee as approved by OMB pursuant to FCRA.

(b) Other than any determination by the President under section 303(a)(7)(b) of the Act, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority to make the required determinations, judgments, certifications, findings, and notifications defined under section 303 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093, in consultation with the Secretary making the required determination under section 202 of this order.

Sec. 306. Strategic and Critical Materials. The Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of the Interior in consultation with the Secretary of Defense as the National Defense Stockpile Manager, are each delegated the authority of the President under section 303(a)(1)(B) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093(a)(1)(B), to encourage the exploration, development, and mining of strategic and critical materials and other materials.

Sec. 307. Substitutes. The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 303(g) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093(g), to make provision for the development of substitutes for strategic and critical materials, critical components, critical technology items, and other resources to aid the national defense.

Sec. 308. Government-Owned Equipment. The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 303(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093(e), to:

(a) procure and install additional equipment, facilities, processes, or improvements to plants, factories, and other industrial facilities owned by the Federal Government and to procure and install Government owned equipment in plants, factories, or other industrial facilities owned by private persons;

(b) provide for the modification or expansion of privately owned facilities, including the modification or improvement of production processes, when taking actions under sections 301, 302, or 303 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2091, 2092, 2093; and

(c) sell or otherwise transfer equipment owned by the Federal Government and installed under section 303(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093(e), to the owners of such plants, factories, or other industrial facilities.

Sec. 309. Defense Production Act Fund. The Secretary of Defense is designated the Defense Production Act Fund Manager, in accordance with section 304(f) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2094(f), and shall carry out the duties specified in section 304 of the Act, in consultation with the agency heads having approved, and appropriated funds for, projects under title III of the Act.

Sec. 310. Critical Items. The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 107(b)(1) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2077(b)(1), to take appropriate action to ensure that critical components, critical technology items, essential materials, and industrial resources are available from reliable sources when needed to meet defense requirements during peacetime, graduated mobilization, and national emergency. Appropriate action may include restricting contract solicitations to reliable sources, restricting contract solicitations to domestic sources (pursuant to statutory authority), stockpiling critical components, and developing substitutes for critical components or critical technology items.

Sec. 311. Strengthening Domestic Capability. The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 107(a) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2077(a), to utilize the authority of title III of the Act or any other provision of law to provide appropriate incentives to develop, maintain, modernize, restore, and expand the productive capacities of domestic sources for critical components, critical technology items, materials, and industrial resources essential for the execution of the national security strategy of the United States.

Sec. 312. Modernization of Equipment. The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense, in accordance with section 108(b) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2078(b), may utilize the authority of title III of the Act to guarantee the purchase or lease of advance manufacturing equipment, and any related services with respect to any such equipment for purposes of the Act. In considering title III projects, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense shall provide a strong preference for proposals submitted by a small business supplier or subcontractor in accordance with section 108(b)(2) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2078(b)(2).

PART IV - VOLUNTARY AGREEMENTS AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES

Sec. 401. Delegations. The authority of the President under sections 708(c) and (d) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2158(c), (d), is delegated to the heads of agencies otherwise delegated authority under this order. The status of the use of such delegations shall be furnished to the Secretary of Homeland Security.

Sec. 402. Advisory Committees. The authority of the President under section 708(d) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2158(d), and delegated in section 401 of this order (relating to establishment of advisory committees) shall be exercised only after consultation with, and in accordance with, guidelines and procedures established by the Administrator of General Services.

Sec. 403. Regulations. The Secretary of Homeland Security, after approval of the Attorney General, and after consultation by the Attorney General with the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, shall promulgate rules pursuant to section 708(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2158(e), incorporating standards and procedures by which voluntary agreements and plans of action may be developed and carried out. Such rules may be adopted by other agencies to fulfill the rulemaking requirement of section 708(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2158(e).

PART V - EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONNEL

Sec. 501. National Defense Executive Reserve. (a) In accordance with section 710(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2160(e), there is established in the executive branch a National Defense Executive Reserve (NDER) composed of persons of recognized expertise from various segments of the private sector and from Government (except full time Federal employees) for training for employment in executive positions in the Federal Government in the event of a national defense emergency.

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall issue necessary guidance for the NDER program, including appropriate guidance for establishment, recruitment, training, monitoring, and activation of NDER units and shall be responsible for the overall coordination of the NDER program. The authority of the President under section 710(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2160(e), to determine periods of national defense emergency is delegated to the Secretary of Homeland Security.

(c) The head of any agency may implement section 501(a) of this order with respect to NDER operations in such agency.

(d) The head of each agency with an NDER unit may exercise the authority under section 703 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2153, to employ civilian personnel when activating all or a part of its NDER unit. The exercise of this authority shall be subject to the provisions of sections 501(e) and (f) of this order and shall not be redelegated.

(e) The head of an agency may activate an NDER unit, in whole or in part, upon the written determination of the Secretary of Homeland Security that an emergency affecting the national defense exists and that the activation of the unit is necessary to carry out the emergency program functions of the agency.

(f) Prior to activating the NDER unit, the head of the agency shall notify, in writing, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism of the impending activation.

Sec. 502. Consultants. The head of each agency otherwise delegated functions under this order is delegated the authority of the President under sections 710(b) and (c) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2160(b), (c), to employ persons of outstanding experience and ability without compensation and to employ experts, consultants, or organizations. The authority delegated by this section may not be redelegated.

PART VI - LABOR REQUIREMENTS

Sec. 601. Secretary of Labor. (a) The Secretary of Labor, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense and the heads of other agencies, as deemed appropriate by the Secretary of Labor, shall:

(1) collect and maintain data necessary to make a continuing appraisal of the Nation's workforce needs for purposes of national defense;

(2) upon request by the Director of Selective Service, and in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, assist the Director of Selective Service in development of policies regulating the induction and deferment of persons for duty in the armed services;

(3) upon request from the head of an agency with authority under this order, consult with that agency with respect to: (i) the effect of contemplated actions on labor demand and utilization; (ii) the relation of labor demand to materials and facilities requirements; and (iii) such other matters as will assist in making the exercise of priority and allocations functions consistent with effective utilization and distribution of labor;

(4) upon request from the head of an agency with authority under this order: (i) formulate plans, programs, and policies for meeting the labor requirements of actions to be taken for national defense purposes; and (ii) estimate training needs to help address national defense requirements and promote necessary and appropriate training programs; and

(5) develop and implement an effective labor management relations policy to support the activities and programs under this order, with the cooperation of other agencies as deemed appropriate by the Secretary of Labor, including the National Labor Relations Board, the Federal Labor Relations Authority, the National Mediation Board, and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.

(b) All agencies shall cooperate with the Secretary of Labor, upon request, for the purposes of this section, to the extent permitted by law.

PART VII - DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT COMMITTEE

Sec. 701. The Defense Production Act Committee. (a) The Defense Production Act Committee (Committee) shall be composed of the following members, in accordance with section 722(b) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2171(b):

(1) The Secretary of State;

(2) The Secretary of the Treasury;

(3) The Secretary of Defense;

(4) The Attorney General;

(5) The Secretary of the Interior;

(6) The Secretary of Agriculture;

(7) The Secretary of Commerce;

(8) The Secretary of Labor;

(9) The Secretary of Health and Human Services;

(10) The Secretary of Transportation;

(11) The Secretary of Energy;

(12) The Secretary of Homeland Security;

(13) The Director of National Intelligence;

(14) The Director of the Central Intelligence Agency;

(15) The Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers;

(16) The Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; and

(17) The Administrator of General Services.

(b) The Director of OMB and the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall be invited to participate in all Committee meetings and activities in an advisory role. The Chairperson, as designated by the President pursuant to section 722 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2171, may invite the heads of other agencies or offices to participate in Committee meetings and activities in an advisory role, as appropriate.

Sec. 702. Offsets. The Secretary of Commerce shall prepare and submit to the Congress the annual report required by section 723 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2172, in consultation with the Secretaries of State, the Treasury, Defense, and Labor, the United States Trade Representative, the Director of National Intelligence, and the heads of other agencies as appropriate. The heads of agencies shall provide the Secretary of Commerce with such information as may be necessary for the effective performance of this function.

PART VIII - GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 801. Definitions. In addition to the definitions in section 702 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2152, the following definitions apply throughout this order:

(a) "Civil transportation" includes movement of persons and property by all modes of transportation in interstate, intrastate, or foreign commerce within the United States, its territories and possessions, and the District of Columbia, and related public storage and warehousing, ports, services, equipment and facilities, such as transportation carrier shop and repair facilities. "Civil transportation" also shall include direction, control, and coordination of civil transportation capacity regardless of ownership. "Civil transportation" shall not include transportation owned or controlled by the Department of Defense, use of petroleum and gas pipelines, and coal slurry pipelines used only to supply energy production facilities directly.

(b) "Energy" means all forms of energy including petroleum, gas (both natural and manufactured), electricity, solid fuels (including all forms of coal, coke, coal chemicals, coal liquification, and coal gasification), solar, wind, other types of renewable energy, atomic energy, and the production, conservation, use, control, and distribution (including pipelines) of all of these forms of energy.

(c) "Farm equipment" means equipment, machinery, and repair parts manufactured for use on farms in connection with the production or preparation for market use of food resources.

(d) "Fertilizer" means any product or combination of products that contain one or more of the elements nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium for use as a plant nutrient.

(e) "Food resources" means all commodities and products, (simple, mixed, or compound), or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals, irrespective of other uses to which such commodities or products may be put, at all stages of processing from the raw commodity to the products thereof in vendible form for human or animal consumption. "Food resources" also means potable water packaged in commercially marketable containers, all starches, sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats and oils, seed, cotton, hemp, and flax fiber, but does not mean any such material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or agricultural product.

(f) "Food resource facilities" means plants, machinery, vehicles (including on farm), and other facilities required for the production, processing, distribution, and storage (including cold storage) of food resources, and for the domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer (excluding transportation thereof).

(g) "Functions" include powers, duties, authority, responsibilities, and discretion.

(h) "Head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense" means the heads of the Departments of State, Justice, the Interior, and Homeland Security, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the General Services Administration, and all other agencies with authority delegated under section 201 of this order.

(i) "Health resources" means drugs, biological products, medical devices, materials, facilities, health supplies, services and equipment required to diagnose, mitigate or prevent the impairment of, improve, treat, cure, or restore the physical or mental health conditions of the population.

(j) "National defense" means programs for military and energy production or construction, military or critical infrastructure assistance to any foreign nation, homeland security, stockpiling, space, and any directly related activity. Such term includes emergency preparedness activities conducted pursuant to title VI of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5195 et seq., and critical infrastructure protection and restoration.

(k) "Offsets" means compensation practices required as a condition of purchase in either government to government or commercial sales of defense articles and/or defense services as defined by the Arms Export Control Act, 22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq., and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, 22 C.F.R. 120.1 130.17.

(l) "Special priorities assistance" means action by resource departments to assist with expediting deliveries, placing rated orders, locating suppliers, resolving production or delivery conflicts between various rated orders, addressing problems that arise in the fulfillment of a rated order or other action authorized by a delegated agency, and determining the validity of rated orders.

(m) "Strategic and critical materials" means materials (including energy) that (1) would be needed to supply the military, industrial, and essential civilian needs of the United States during a national emergency, and (2) are not found or produced in the United States in sufficient quantities to meet such need and are vulnerable to the termination or reduction of the availability of the material.

(n) "Water resources" means all usable water, from all sources, within the jurisdiction of the United States, that can be managed, controlled, and allocated to meet emergency requirements, except "water resources" does not include usable water that qualifies as "food resources."

Sec. 802. General. (a) Except as otherwise provided in section 802(c) of this order, the authorities vested in the President by title VII of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2151 et seq., are delegated to the head of each agency in carrying out the delegated authorities under the Act and this order, by the Secretary of Labor in carrying out part VI of this order, and by the Secretary of the Treasury in exercising the functions assigned in Executive Order 11858, as amended.

(b) The authorities that may be exercised and performed pursuant to section 802(a) of this order shall include:

(1) the power to redelegate authorities, and to authorize the successive redelegation of authorities to agencies, officers, and employees of the Government; and

(2) the power of subpoena under section 705 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2155, with respect to (i) authorities delegated in parts II, III, and section 702 of this order, and (ii) the functions assigned to the Secretary of the Treasury in Executive Order 11858, as amended, provided that the subpoena power referenced in subsections (i) and (ii) shall be utilized only after the scope and purpose of the investigation, inspection, or inquiry to which the subpoena relates have been defined either by the appropriate officer identified in section 802(a) of this order or by such other person or persons as the officer shall designate.

(c) Excluded from the authorities delegated by section 802(a) of this order are authorities delegated by parts IV and V of this order, authorities in section 721 and 722 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2170 2171, and the authority with respect to fixing compensation under section 703 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2153.

Sec. 803. Authority. (a) Executive Order 12919 of June 3, 1994, and sections 401(3) (4) of Executive Order 12656 of November 18, 1988, are revoked. All other previously issued orders, regulations, rulings, certificates, directives, and other actions relating to any function affected by this order shall remain in effect except as they are inconsistent with this order or are subsequently amended or revoked under proper authority. Nothing in this order shall affect the validity or force of anything done under previous delegations or other assignment of authority under the Act.

(b) Nothing in this order shall affect the authorities assigned under Executive Order 11858 of May 7, 1975, as amended, except as provided in section 802 of this order.

(c) Nothing in this order shall affect the authorities assigned under Executive Order 12472 of April 3, 1984, as amended.

Sec. 804. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect functions of the Director of OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
March 16, 2012.

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Charting GOP Super PAC Cash

By Josh Israel, ThinkProgress

23 February 12



Once again this week, independent-expenditure-only "Super PACs" disclosed their donors for the month of January 2012. A ThinkProgress analysis of these new filings and previously available data reveals that 19 wealthy donors have already given a million dollars or more each, combining to funnel $46.75 million to Republican-allied Super PACs so far this cycle.

It comes as little surprise that this list is dominated by financial sector investors (8), energy and chemical producers (4), and real estate developers (3). All are white. Only one, the wife of casino tycoon Sheldon Edelson, is female. The Obama administration has backed financial sector consumer protections and environmental regulations unpopular with big Wall Street and big energy.

The 19 donors’ contributions accounted for about 53 percent of the $88.2 million combined receipts for those committees. Here are the 19:
Donor Donations Sector
Harold Simmons/Contran Corp. $14.1M Chemicals
Sheldon Adelson $5M Casinos and hotels
Miriam Adelson $5M Casinos and hotels
Bob Perry $3.5M Real Estate/Construction
Peter Thiel $2.6M Finance/Investment
Jon Huntsman Sr. $2.2M Chemicals
Jerry Perenchio Living Trust $2M Media
Julian Robertson $1.25M Finance/Investment
Robert B. Rowling $1.1M Energy
Edward Conard $1M Finance/Investment
Robert Mercer $1M Finance/Investment
John Paulson $1M Finance/Investment
Paul Singer $1M Finance/Investment
Foster Friess $1M Finance/Investment
Rooney Holdings Inc. $1M Real Estate/Construction
William Dore $1M Energy
Whiteco Industries $1M Real Estate/Construction
F8 LLC (Jeremy Blickenstaff) $1M Finance/Investment
Eli Publishing (Steve Lund) $1M Cosmetics

These donations went to Super PACs backing GOP hopefuls Newt Gingrich (Winning Our Future), Ron Paul (Endorse Liberty), Mitt Romney (Restore Our Future), Rick Santorum (Red, White & Blue), backing former candidates Jon Huntsman Jr. (Our Destiny), Rick Perry (Make Us Great Again), and Republican candidates in general (American Crossroads).

To equal just their Super PAC contributions, political campaigns would need to collect more than 18,000 checks for $5,000 - the individual limit. Republican strategist Christopher LaCivita told the New York Times that these super donors are "serious business tycoons." And these serious business tycoons are seriously overwhelming the political system with their contributions.

Monday, February 6, 2012

Writing Advice: setting incremental goals




The hardest part of setting incremental goals, such as 1,000 words a day, 6 days a week, is that when Monday rolls around … you're back at zero. It's time for another 1,000 words just to get out of the red.

Last week I got 8,230 words out and completed Chapter 39. Today I'll give it one more pass and then get into Chapter 40.

Sailing east from Langkawi to Majuro




There is a narrow window, from December to March, when the winds allow sailing towards the east along the Equator. Later in the year the passage from PNG to Micronesia becomes a little easier, and then in July-August it is possible to sail from Majuro to Midway Island and then the NW coast of the USA with out too much trouble. But no one tempts the weather Gods by saying such things out loud.

DETENTION OF U.S. PERSONS: WHAT IS THE EXISTING LAW?

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2012, Issue No. 10
February 6, 2012

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/


** DETENTION OF U.S. PERSONS: WHAT IS THE EXISTING LAW?
** MILITARY INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONAL BULLETIN ONLINE


DETENTION OF U.S. PERSONS: WHAT IS THE EXISTING LAW?

When Congress passed the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, it
included provisions that authorized U.S. armed forces to detain persons who
are captured in the conflict with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated
forces. However, Congress also said that those provisions did not provide
any new authority to detain U.S. citizens or others who may be captured in
the United States.

"Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or
authority relating to the detention of United States citizens...," section
1021(e) of the Act states. "We are simply codifying existing law," said
Sen. Carl Levin, chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, at the time.

But this was an evasion, since existing law regarding the detention of
U.S. persons is indeterminate in important respects.

A new report from the Congressional Research Service fleshes out the law
of detention, identifying what is known to be true as well as what is
unsettled and unresolved.

It is perfectly clear, for example, that a U.S. citizen who fought
alongside enemy forces against the United States on a foreign battlefield
could be lawfully detained. This was affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in
the case Hamdi v. Rumsfeld.

On the other hand, the CRS report explains, "the President's legal
authority to militarily detain terrorist suspects apprehended in the United
States has not been definitively settled."

Nor has Congress helped to settle it. "This bill does not endorse either
side's interpretation," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein on December 1 about the
defense authorization act, "but leaves it to the courts to decide."

So if a detention of a U.S. person does occur, the CRS said, "it will be
up to a court to determine Congress's intent when it enacted the AUMF [the
2001 Authorization to Use Military Force], or alternatively, to decide
whether the law as it was subsequently developed by the courts and
executive branch sufficiently established that authority for such detention
already exists."

Up to now, "Lower courts that have addressed questions the Supreme Court
left unanswered have not achieved a consensus on the extent to which
Congress has authorized the detention without trial of U.S. persons as
'enemy combatants,' and Congress has not so far clarified its intent."

The new CRS report traces the development of U.S. detention policy from
the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 through the Civil War, the two World
Wars, and the Cold War up to the present day. See "Detention of U.S.
Persons as Enemy Belligerents" by CRS legislative attorney Jennifer K.
Elsea, February 1, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R42337.pdf

Some other new (or newly updated) CRS reports obtained by Secrecy News
that have not been made readily available to the public include the
following.

"Terrorist Watch List Screening and Brady Background Checks for Firearms,"
February 1, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/R42336.pdf

"War Powers Resolution: Presidential Compliance," February 1, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33532.pdf

"The U.S. Postal Service's Financial Condition: Overview and Issues for
Congress," January 27, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41024.pdf


MILITARY INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONAL BULLETIN ONLINE

The Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin is a quarterly journal
published by the U.S. Army to promote awareness and discussion of current
topics in military intelligence. Although unclassified, the Bulletin is
not made available online by the Army. Recent volumes can be found,
however, on the Federation of American Scientists website.

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/army/mipb/index.html

The two latest issues are devoted to "Intelligence in the Current
Environment" (April-June 2011) and "Enabling Intelligence Analysis"
(July-September 2011).


_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

The Secrecy News Blog is at:
http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, go to:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/subscribe.html

To UNSUBSCRIBE, go to
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/unsubscribe.html

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

Secrecy News is archived at:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

Support the FAS Project on Government Secrecy with a donation:
http://www.fas.org/member/donate_today.html


_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
twitter: @saftergood

Thursday, February 2, 2012

SECRECY NEWS

from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2012, Issue No. 8
February 1, 2012

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/


** AN OVERVIEW OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES, AND MORE FROM CRS
** SOME HISTORICAL INTELLIGENCE SATELLITE IMAGERY DECLASSIFIED
** RAVEN ROCK AND CONTINUITY OF GOVERNMENT


AN OVERVIEW OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES, AND MORE FROM CRS

Over the past decade, the number of U.S. special operations forces (SOF)
personnel has nearly doubled, while budgets for special operations have
nearly tripled, and overseas deployments have quadrupled, according to a
newly updated report from the Congressional Research Service.

"Special Operations Forces are elite military units with special training
and equipment that can infiltrate into hostile territory through land, sea,
or air to conduct a variety of operations, many of them classified," the
CRS report explains. "SOF personnel undergo rigorous selection and lengthy
specialized training. The U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM)
oversees the training, doctrine, and equipping of all U.S. SOF units."

Following an overview of the structure of U.S. special operations forces,
the CRS report discusses the implications for special operations of recent
legislation including the 2012 defense authorization act. See "U.S.
Special Operations Forces (SOF): Background and Issues for Congress,"
January 11, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS21048.pdf

A copy of the new "U.S. Special Operations Command Fact Book 2012,"
prepared by USSOCOM Public Affairs, is available here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/socom/factbook-2012.pdf

Other noteworthy new reports from the Congressional Research Service that
have not been made readily available to the public include the following:

"Arms Sales: Congressional Review Process," February 1, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL31675.pdf

"The Nunn-McCurdy Act: Background, Analysis, and Issues for Congress,"
January 31, 2011:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R41293.pdf

"Immigration-Related Detention: Current Legislative Issues," January 12,
2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL32369.pdf


SOME HISTORICAL INTELLIGENCE SATELLITE IMAGERY DECLASSIFIED

A handful of historical intelligence satellite images were declassified
last month to coincide with a new display of the GAMBIT and HEXAGON spy
satellites at the National Air Force Museum at Wright-Patterson Air Force
Base.

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123287508

The GAMBIT and HEXAGON satellites were formally declassified last
September on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the National
Reconnaissance Office. At that time, the NRO released voluminous
documentation on the development of those satellites. But the associated
imagery, which is held by the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, was
not released. Now a small number of satellite images have been made
public.

However, the newly disclosed images are not originals, but are embedded in
"posters" published by the NRO. As such, they do not lend themselves to
detailed analysis, complained Charles P. Vick of GlobalSecurity.org. Nor
are the original negatives of the declassified photos available for public
inspection.

http://www.nro.gov/foia/declass/GAMBHEX%20Posters.html

There is an annotation on the released images indicating that they were
declassified on January 13, 2012 by the Director of National Intelligence,
which would be consistent with the provisions of the 1995 executive order
12951.

"The images have undoubtedly been degraded, because GAMBIT and HEXAGON’s
best imagery capabilities remain classified," wrote Dwayne Day in The Space
Review. "These photographs are hopefully the first in many yet to come, and
will help us better understand the battles in the shadows of the Cold War."

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2013/1

Among other things, the NRO also released a new edition of the 1973
histories of GAMBIT and HEXAGON written by Robert L. Perry.

http://www.nro.gov/whatsnew.html

"Perry's histories... serve as exemplars of the art and craft of
historians. They are rich in detail, well-sourced, and written with
engaging prose," according to an informative introduction by James D.
Outzen of the Center for the Study of National Reconnaissance.

Unfortunately, the new edition, while handsome, is not exemplary because
it obscures the redaction of material that is still considered classified: "With respect to redacted material, we have edited the volumes to smooth
the flow of language in the volume, rather than indicate where material was
redacted." This was a mistake.

Remarkably, the NRO initiative to declassify GAMBIT and HEXAGON program
information, including imagery, dates back to 1997. At that time, a
seven-month implementation schedule was optimistically anticipated.

"I would like to hiqhliqht this declassification effort with a National
Reconnaissance Office (NRO) ceremony (including the release of selected
declassified imagery from both systems) in October 1997," wrote NRO Deputy
Director Keith R. Hall in a March 1997 memorandum that was obtained by
Jeffrey Richelson of the National Security Archive.

http://www.fas.org/irp/nro/hex-declass.pdf

As it turned out, the declassification process took 14 years, not seven
months.


RAVEN ROCK AND CONTINUITY OF GOVERNMENT

A newly revised U.S. Air Force directive on continuity of operations under
emergency circumstances refers matter-of-factly to Raven Rock Mountain
Complex, a largely restricted U.S. government facility in Pennsylvania. See "Air Force Continuity of Operations (COOP) Program," Air Force
Instruction 10-208, 15 December 2011:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usaf/afi10-208.pdf

Raven Rock, also known as Site R, has been operational since 1953 for
purposes of emergency communications, disaster relocation and recovery. But most operations at the facility have been classified, and the facility
itself was rarely mentioned in official publications during most of the
past half century. A previous edition of the new Air Force Instruction
that was issued in 2005 made no reference to Raven Rock.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/c3i/raven_rock.htm

_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

The Secrecy News Blog is at:
http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, go to:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/subscribe.html

To UNSUBSCRIBE, go to
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/unsubscribe.html

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

Secrecy News is archived at:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

Support the FAS Project on Government Secrecy with a donation:
http://www.fas.org/member/donate_today.html


_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
twitter: @saftergood

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Boat Building in Langkawi

Romney has income tax problems

Fox News tells America what it needs to know

SECRECY NEWS

from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2012, Issue No. 5
January 23, 2012

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/


** COURT SAYS REVIEW OF SECURITY CLEARANCE DISPUTE IS "PROHIBITED"
** AFGHANISTAN CASUALTIES, AND MORE FROM CRS
** DOD SUPPORT TO FOREIGN DISASTER RELIEF
** INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT TO MILITARY OPERATIONS


COURT SAYS REVIEW OF SECURITY CLEARANCE DISPUTE IS "PROHIBITED"

A government agency's decision to revoke an employee's security clearance
cannot be reviewed by a federal court even if the decision is based on
ethnic discrimination or religious prejudice or other unconstitutional
grounds, a court said last week.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/hegab-opinion.pdf

Judge James C. Cacheris of the Eastern District of Virginia dismissed a
lawsuit brought by Mahmoud M. Hegab, a budget analyst at the National
Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA). Mr. Hegab alleged that his security
clearance had been revoked by NGA "based solely on [his] wife's religion,
Islam, her constitutionally protected speech, and her association with, and
employment by, an Islamic faith-based organization." ("Clearance Lost Due
to Anti-Islamic Prejudice, Lawsuit Says," Secrecy News, October 6, 2011)

http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2011/10/clearance_lawsuit.html

The NGA disputed the claim and moved to dismiss the lawsuit.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/hegab-mtdmemo11.pdf

Mr. Hegab, represented by attorney Sheldon I. Cohen, responded in
opposition on December 14.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/hegab-opp15.pdf

But in his January 19 opinion, Judge Cacheris said that it didn't matter
even if the plaintiff's allegations were true, because the court lacked the
authority to review the underlying bases of the dispute.

"A determination of whether Hegab’s security clearance was revoked due
to legitimate national security concerns or, as Hegab alleges,
constitutionally impermissible bases would necessarily require a review of
the merits of NGA’s decision. Absent clear congressional directive, which
Hegab fails to identify, such a review is flatly prohibited by Egan and
Fourth Circuit precedent," Judge Cacheris wrote.

"Egan" here refers to the 1988 U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case of
Department of the Navy v. Egan, which has often been invoked in support of
broad and unreviewable executive branch authority in national security
policy.

A critique of Egan and its subsequent application was presented by
constitutional scholar Louis Fisher, then of the Law Library of Congress,
in "Judicial Interpretations of Egan," November 13, 2009.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/egan.pdf


AFGHANISTAN CASUALTIES, AND MORE FROM CRS

New or updated reports from the Congressional Research Service that have
not been made readily available to the public include the following.

"Afghanistan Casualties: Military Forces and Civilians," January 18, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R41084.pdf

"FY2012 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel
Policy Issues," January 5, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R41874.pdf

"Spectrum Policy in the Age of Broadband: Issues for Congress," January 5,
2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40674.pdf

"The Federal Bureau of Investigation and Terrorism Investigations,"
December 28, 2011:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/R41780.pdf

"Economic Downturns and Crime," December 19, 2011:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40726.pdf


DOD SUPPORT TO FOREIGN DISASTER RELIEF

The Department of Defense has prepared a guide for military personnel who
are engaged in foreign disaster relief operations, an endeavor which arises
with some frequency.

"The U.S. Government (USG) responds to approximately 70-80 natural
disasters across the globe each year. In approximately 10-15 percent of
these disaster responses, the Department of Defense (DoD) lends support to
the overall USG effort."

"DoD disaster assistance can range from a single aircraft delivering
relief supplies, to a fullscale deployment of a brigade-size or larger task
force. Though the overall percentage of disasters requiring DoD support is
relatively small, these disasters tend to be crises of the largest
magnitude and/or the greatest complexity."

The new guide "offers an overarching guide and reference for military
responders in disaster relief operations." See "Department of Defense
Support to Foreign Disaster Relief," GTA-90-01-030, 13 July 2011 (large
pdf):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/disaster.pdf


INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT TO MILITARY OPERATIONS

The Joint Chiefs of Staff have produced updated doctrine on intelligence
support to military operations. The new doctrine reflects changes in
intelligence organizations, roles and missions.

Among other things, the new publication introduces the term
"biometric-enabled intelligence" or BEI. "BEI is derived from the
collection, processing, and exploitation of biometric signatures; the
contextual data associated with those signatures; and other available
information that answers a commander's or other decision maker's
information needs concerning persons, networks, or populations of
interest."

See Joint Publication 2-01, "Joint and National Intelligence Support to
Military Operations," 05 January 2012:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/jp2_01.pdf


_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

The Secrecy News Blog is at:
http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, go to:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/subscribe.html

To UNSUBSCRIBE, go to
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/unsubscribe.html

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

Secrecy News is archived at:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

Support the FAS Project on Government Secrecy with a donation:
http://www.fas.org/member/donate_today.html


_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
twitter: @saftergood

Thursday, January 19, 2012

SECRECY NEWS

from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2012, Issue No. 4
January 19, 2012

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/


** ARMY FORESEES EXPANDED USE OF DRONES IN U.S. AIRSPACE
** FOREIGN MILITARY ASSISTANCE, AND MORE FROM CRS


ARMY FORESEES EXPANDED USE OF DRONES IN U.S. AIRSPACE

The Army issued a new directive last week to govern the growing use of
unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) or "drones" within the United States for
training missions and for "domestic operations."

"The Army's unmanned aircraft systems represent emerging technology that
requires access to the National Airspace System," wrote Army Secretary John
M. McHugh in a January 13 memorandum.

Towards that end, the Army produced a revised policy on UAS operations to
support "expanded UAS access to the National Airspace System." A copy of
the new policy was obtained by Secrecy News. See Army Directive 2012-02,
January 13, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/ad2012_02.pdf

Much of the Army's UAS activity will be devoted to UAS operator training
conducted at or near military facilities, the policy indicates. But beyond
such training activities, the military also envisions a role for UAS in
unspecified "domestic operations" in civilian airspace, according to a 2007
Memorandum of Agreement between the Department of Defense and the Federal
Aviation Administration, which regulates domestic air traffic.

The 2007 Memorandum, which is appended to the new Army directive, was said
to "allow, in accordance with applicable law, increased access for DoD UAS
into the elements of the NAS [National Airspace System] outside of
DoD-managed Restricted Areas or Warning Areas."

The 2007 agreement was intended to "ensure DoD UAS assets have NAS access
for domestic operations, including the War on Terror (WOT).... This
guidance applies to all DoD UAS, whether operated by Active, Reserve,
National Guard, or other personnel."

A prior edition of the Army's "Unmanned Aircraft System Flight
Regulations," which will be updated to incorporate the latest policy, can
be found on the Federation of American Scientists web site here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/ar95-23.pdf

The Electronic Frontier Foundation last week filed a Freedom of
Information Act lawsuit seeking information on domestic drone operations.

https://www.eff.org/press/releases/who-flying-unmanned-aircraft-us


FOREIGN MILITARY ASSISTANCE, AND MORE FROM CRS

Some new or updated reports from the Congressional Research Service that
have not been made readily available to the public include the following.

"Security Assistance Reform: 'Section 1206' Background and Issues for
Congress," January 13, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22855.pdf

"The Berry Amendment: Requiring Defense Procurement To Come From Domestic
Sources," January 13, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL31236.pdf

"In Brief: Assessing DOD's New Strategic Guidance," January 12, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R42146.pdf

"Circular A-76 and the Moratorium on DOD Competitions: Background and
Issues for Congress," January 17, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40854.pdf

"The Federal Networking and Information Technology Research and
Development Program: Background, Funding and Activities," January 13, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33586.pdf

"Nuclear Power Plant Design and Seismic Safety Considerations," January
12, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41805.pdf

"Chemical Facility Security: Issues and Options for the 112th Congress,"
January 13, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R41642.pdf


_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

The Secrecy News Blog is at:
http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, go to:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/subscribe.html

To UNSUBSCRIBE, go to
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/unsubscribe.html

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

Secrecy News is archived at:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

Support the FAS Project on Government Secrecy with a donation:
http://www.fas.org/member/donate_today.html


_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
twitter: @saftergood

SECRECY NEWS

from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2012, Issue No. 4
January 19, 2012

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/


** ARMY FORESEES EXPANDED USE OF DRONES IN U.S. AIRSPACE
** FOREIGN MILITARY ASSISTANCE, AND MORE FROM CRS


ARMY FORESEES EXPANDED USE OF DRONES IN U.S. AIRSPACE

The Army issued a new directive last week to govern the growing use of
unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) or "drones" within the United States for
training missions and for "domestic operations."

"The Army's unmanned aircraft systems represent emerging technology that
requires access to the National Airspace System," wrote Army Secretary John
M. McHugh in a January 13 memorandum.

Towards that end, the Army produced a revised policy on UAS operations to
support "expanded UAS access to the National Airspace System." A copy of
the new policy was obtained by Secrecy News. See Army Directive 2012-02,
January 13, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/ad2012_02.pdf

Much of the Army's UAS activity will be devoted to UAS operator training
conducted at or near military facilities, the policy indicates. But beyond
such training activities, the military also envisions a role for UAS in
unspecified "domestic operations" in civilian airspace, according to a 2007
Memorandum of Agreement between the Department of Defense and the Federal
Aviation Administration, which regulates domestic air traffic.

The 2007 Memorandum, which is appended to the new Army directive, was said
to "allow, in accordance with applicable law, increased access for DoD UAS
into the elements of the NAS [National Airspace System] outside of
DoD-managed Restricted Areas or Warning Areas."

The 2007 agreement was intended to "ensure DoD UAS assets have NAS access
for domestic operations, including the War on Terror (WOT).... This
guidance applies to all DoD UAS, whether operated by Active, Reserve,
National Guard, or other personnel."

A prior edition of the Army's "Unmanned Aircraft System Flight
Regulations," which will be updated to incorporate the latest policy, can
be found on the Federation of American Scientists web site here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/ar95-23.pdf

The Electronic Frontier Foundation last week filed a Freedom of
Information Act lawsuit seeking information on domestic drone operations.

https://www.eff.org/press/releases/who-flying-unmanned-aircraft-us


FOREIGN MILITARY ASSISTANCE, AND MORE FROM CRS

Some new or updated reports from the Congressional Research Service that
have not been made readily available to the public include the following.

"Security Assistance Reform: 'Section 1206' Background and Issues for
Congress," January 13, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22855.pdf

"The Berry Amendment: Requiring Defense Procurement To Come From Domestic
Sources," January 13, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL31236.pdf

"In Brief: Assessing DOD's New Strategic Guidance," January 12, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R42146.pdf

"Circular A-76 and the Moratorium on DOD Competitions: Background and
Issues for Congress," January 17, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40854.pdf

"The Federal Networking and Information Technology Research and
Development Program: Background, Funding and Activities," January 13, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33586.pdf

"Nuclear Power Plant Design and Seismic Safety Considerations," January
12, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41805.pdf

"Chemical Facility Security: Issues and Options for the 112th Congress,"
January 13, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R41642.pdf


_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

The Secrecy News Blog is at:
http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, go to:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/subscribe.html

To UNSUBSCRIBE, go to
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/unsubscribe.html

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

Secrecy News is archived at:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

Support the FAS Project on Government Secrecy with a donation:
http://www.fas.org/member/donate_today.html


_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
twitter: @saftergood