{"id":2803,"date":"2000-10-13T12:00:50","date_gmt":"2000-10-13T17:00:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/?p=2803"},"modified":"2026-05-09T15:45:25","modified_gmt":"2026-05-09T20:45:25","slug":"polygraph-hell-at-the-national-laboratories","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2000\/10\/13\/polygraph-hell-at-the-national-laboratories\/","title":{"rendered":"&#8220;Polygraph Hell at the National Laboratories&#8221;"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"entry\">\n\n\n<p>Steven Aftergood <a href=\"https:\/\/sgp.fas.org\/news\/secrecy\/2000\/10\/101300.html\">reports<\/a> in today&#8217;s edition of the electronic newsletter <em><a href=\"https:\/\/sgp.fas.org\/news\/secrecy\/index.html\">Secrecy News<\/a><\/em>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\"><p>POLYGRAPH HELL AT THE NATIONAL LABORATORIES<\/p><p>In its mad pursuit of a misconceived ideal of &#8220;security,&#8221; Congress has quietly imposed broad new polygraph testing requirements on Energy Department employees and contractors.<\/p><p>Subtle changes adopted in the conference on the defense authorization bill will require polygraph tests on an additional 5000 persons in the nuclear weapons labs, Senator Pete Domenici noted in a press release yesterday. That is an increase from the current level of around 800 persons subject to polygraph testing.<\/p><p>&#8220;I am dismayed that the conferees took it upon themselves to adopt additional provisions on polygraphs,&#8221; Sen. Domenici said. &#8220;I find it astounding, especially in light of the findings in the Baker-Hamilton Report, that the conferees included these provisions.&#8221;<\/p><p>&#8220;The Baker-Hamilton Report clearly indicated that we should avoid further &#8216;Made in Washington&#8217; rules that frustrate scientific pursuits and only serve to demoralize laboratory personnel. I believe these provisions will only make a bad situation worse,&#8221; Sen. Domenici said. &#8220;Security will be a moot point if our national laboratories fail to achieve scientific advances worth protecting.&#8221;<\/p><p>The Domenici press release is posted here:<\/p><p><a href=\"https:\/\/sgp.fas.org\/news\/2000\/10\/domenici.html\">http:\/\/www.fas.org\/sgp\/news\/2000\/10\/domenici.html<\/a><\/p><p>The Baker-Hamilton Report is posted here:<\/p><p><a href=\"https:\/\/sgp.fas.org\/library\/bakerham.html\">http:\/\/www.fas.org\/sgp\/library\/bakerham.html<\/a><\/p><p>By expanding the definition of who is a &#8220;covered person,&#8221; the new polygraph provision will impose testing requirements on an additional 5000 people, based on an informal estimate that NNSA chief Gen. John Gordon provided to Senator Domenici last week, a Domenici aide said.<\/p><p>The new provision, section 3135 of the defense authorization act, is posted here:<\/p><p><a href=\"https:\/\/sgp.fas.org\/congress\/2000\/defauth.html#3135\">http:\/\/www.fas.org\/sgp\/congress\/2000\/defauth.html#3135<\/a><\/p><p>It amends last year&#8217;s polygraph legislation, posted here:<\/p><p><a href=\"https:\/\/sgp.fas.org\/othergov\/polygraph\/doe_ci.html\">http:\/\/www.fas.org\/sgp\/othergov\/polygraph\/doe_ci.html<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Steven Aftergood reports in today&#8217;s edition of the electronic newsletter Secrecy News: POLYGRAPH HELL AT THE NATIONAL LABORATORIES In its mad pursuit of a misconceived ideal of &#8220;security,&#8221; Congress has quietly imposed broad new polygraph testing requirements on Energy Department employees and contractors. Subtle changes adopted in the conference on the defense authorization bill will &#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[287,70],"class_list":{"0":"post-2803","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-polygraph","7":"tag-doe","8":"tag-polygraph-screening","9":"anons"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2803","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2803"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2803\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5435,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2803\/revisions\/5435"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2803"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2803"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2803"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}