PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.

CORRECT Act

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 29, 2014

Clearance and Over-Classification Reform and Reduction Act or the CORRECT Act - Amends the Reducing Over-Classification Act (ROCA) to require each agency inspector general, by September 30, 2019, to carry out not fewer than three evaluations to assess whether applicable classification policies, rules, and procedures have been followed, the last two of which shall assess: (1) the degree to which the incentives for accurate classification decisions have improved the accuracy of such decisions and achieved a reduction in classified information, (2) progress made and the adequacy of the records to support each self-inspection program determination, and (3) each agency's procedures and activities regarding classification challenges. Directs the President to: (1) issue a standardized sampling technique for agency self-inspection programs to address any vulnerabilities in such programs, and (2) establish goals for reducing classified information by 10% by five years after this Act's enactment through declassification and improved classification decisionmaking.

Amends the Public Interest Declassification Act of 2000 to require the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to publish, annually, information on the status of agency efforts at reducing the holding of classified information. Requires the Public Interest Declassification Board to review classification guidance on an ongoing basis, including assessing its clarity to ensure that only the minimum necessary information is classified, and to submit recommendations for improving such guidance and for harmonizing and reducing such guidance across the federal government.

Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop and disseminate to components of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and make available to other agencies guidance on best practices and strategies to implement ROCA.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

Directs the head of each agency with the authority to designate a national security position to submit a report that provides information regarding any national security position for which access to classified materials is not required and the position is not determined to be a public trust position.

Requires the Directors of National Intelligence and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to establish requirements for, and requires investigation service providers to use, a uniform markings process to identify the investigation service provider that originated each piece of information in a current investigation file.

Requires: (1) the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board to publish standards for the protection of national security and promotion of fairness, transparency, and employee protections, including safeguards to preserve the rights and confidentiality of whistleblowers with respect to the operation of a continuous evaluation program (continually reviewing the background of an individual eligible for access to classified information) or an insider threat program (monitoring the activity of such an individual) by a federal agency; (2) each agency that is operating such a program to certify that such program is in compliance with such standards or suspend it until it is compliant; and (3) any agency that establishes such a program after enactment of this Act to conduct a pilot program for at least 120 days that uses a representative sample of individuals eligible for access to classified information.

Requires the President: (1) for each adjudicative guideline for individuals with access to classified information, to update and tailor the conditions that mitigate security concerns to address continuous evaluation of such individuals; and (2) to establish adjudicative guidelines for an individual who is subject to an adverse decision based on an insider threat program.

Entitles an employee for whom a final determination of ineligibility for a national security position has been made to appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board.

Allows an agency adjudication that an individual may not have access to classified information to be made only by a federal employee and not by an automated system.

Requires the head of each element of the intelligence community to report on its implementation of policy directives regarding contacts with news media by intelligence community personnel.

Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to:

require DHS to designate the sensitivity level of national security positions within DHS in an accurate and consistent manner;

biennially review all such designations and adjust access to classified information as warranted;

annually survey the head of each DHS component with the authority to adjudicate a current investigation file for a national security position to help determine whether investigation service providers are adhering to federal requirements;

utilize metrics to assess the timeliness, completeness, and overall quality of the provision of services by such providers;

issue uniform standards to be utilized by DHS for adjudicating the eligibility of an individual for access to classified information;

issue a DHS-wide directive that sets forth uniform criteria and procedures for the suspension, denial, and revocation of such eligibility;

report on the denials, suspensions, revocations, and appeals of such eligibility of individuals throughout DHS; and

establish an internal appeals panel for final national security clearance denial and revocation determinations.

Requires the Comptroller General (GAO) to report on the impact of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 on security clearance processes and reciprocity.

Amends the federal criminal code to authorize increasing by one year the maximum term of imprisonment for making fraudulent or false statements in any matter within the jurisdiction of the federal government if the offense involves an investigation file for a national security position.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Sen. Wyden, Ron [D-OR] · D–OR

Committees

  • Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

    2. Introduced in Senate

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    Source last updated: Jan 28, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

    Explore the bill from different angles

    Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.

    Neutral evidence review

    Objective

    Analyze S.2683 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.

    View full prompt & sources
    Fairness and public impact

    Progressive lens

    Examine S.2683 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.

    View full prompt & sources
    Institutions and government scope

    Conservative lens

    Examine S.2683 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.

    View full prompt & sources
    Individual rights and government power

    Liberty lens

    Examine S.2683 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.

    View full prompt & sources