
      
         Copyright © 1999 Nando Media
		 Copyright © 1999 Associated Press
   
      
	  
From Time to Time: Nando's in-depth look at the 20th century
	  
	       	       
	       		    
	  	  
By DEB RIECHMANN
      
       WASHINGTON (August 24, 1999 3:03 p.m. EDT http://www.nandotimes.com) - Box-by-box, line-by-line, government record keepers have spent three years working to declassify 600 million pages of documents, opening doors to America's secret past. 
  Now, because Washington fears that China got its hands on U.S. 
nuclear secrets, these bleary-eyed declassifiers could face a 
daunting new task: Doing it again. 
  Legislation headed for approval in Congress would require all of 
the documents to be re-examined to make sure that sensitive details 
about the U.S. nuclear arsenal don't slip out of the government's 
attic. 
  "This is all part of the frenzy about Chinese espionage that is 
driving Washington crazy," said Steven Aftergood, who directs The 
Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American 
Scientists. "The idea that they're going to reread material that's 
already been declassified is preposterous. It will basically 
cripple the declassification program by driving it in circles." 
  Present efforts to lift the veil of government secrecy are 
driven by an executive order President Clinton signed in 1995. The 
order instructs federal agencies to open - by April 2000 - 
classified records that contain historical material and are more 
than 25 years old. Exceptions are narrowly defined. 
  In the past three years, more than 600 million pages have been 
declassified. 
  Subjects range from the Cold War to Vietnam, POWs to UFOs. 
Researchers are rewriting history with new information about the 
U.S.-Soviet arms race, the failed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, a 
1973 coup in Chile, covert action around the globe, and more. 
  The public already can access 400 million pages that have been 
unsealed. Another 200 million pages are declassified, but are not 
yet on public shelves. Nearly 1 billion more pages still must be 
reviewed. 
  Declassification was moving at a fast clip until last year when 
some lawmakers worried that nuclear secrets - still classified 
under the Atomic Energy Act - weren't being properly protected. 
Sens. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.; Richard Shelby, R-Ala., and Bob Smith, 
I-N.H., wrote to National Security Adviser Samuel Berger saying 
that "in a frenzied attempt" to meet the April 2000 deadline, 
documents containing sensitive nuclear weapons information may have 
been released, or were in danger of being released. 
  Such concerns prompted Congress to pass a law last year 
requiring declassifiers to come up with a plan to scan documents, 
page-by-page, looking for nuclear material - unless the records 
were "highly unlikely" to contain such information. 
  This year, after a government scientist suspected of giving 
nuclear secrets to China was fired in March for alleged security 
violations at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, 
lawmakers sought even tougher scrutiny. 
  Buried in the defense authorization act for fiscal 2000 is a 
provision that would make last year's law retroactive. It would 
require record keepers to re-inspect documents declassified since 
the executive order took effect about three years ago. 
  "In a recent 140-page study of improperly released nuclear 
weapons data, the administration detailed numerous examples of key 
design information that was not intended to be released, but, in 
fact, was released," Kyl said. "We have to be careful not to 
continue to accidentally release sensitive nuclear weapons design 
data that countries like Iran and Iraq could use to advance their 
own nuclear weapons programs." 
  Already approved by a House-Senate conference committee, 
Congress is to vote on the bill after its summer recess. 
  National Security Council spokesman David Leavy would not 
disclose the administration's reaction to the provision, except to 
say: "We have to be reasonable while balancing national security 
concerns." He also would not speculate on whether Clinton would 
sign the bill.