10 U.S.C. § 2388

Security clearances for facilities of certain companies

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 10 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)Authority.—If the senior management official of a covered company does not have a security clearance, the Secretary of Defense may grant a security clearance to a facility of such company only if the following criteria are met:(1) The company has appointed a senior officer, director, or employee of the company who has a security clearance at the level of the security clearance of the facility to act as the senior management official of the company with respect to such facility.(2) Any senior management official, senior officer, or director of the company who does not have such a security clearance will not have access to any classified information, including with respect to such facility.(3) The company has certified to the Secretary that the senior officer, director, or employee appointed under paragraph (1) has the authority to act on behalf of the company with respect to such facility independent of any senior management official, senior officer, or director described in paragraph (2).(4) The facility meets all of the requirements to be granted a security clearance other than any requirement relating to the senior management official of the company having an appropriate security clearance.(b)Covered Company.—In this section, the term “covered company” means a company that has entered into a contract or agreement with the Department of Defense, assists the Department, or requires a facility to process classified information.(Added Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title XVI, § 1621(a), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1732, § 2410s; amended Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title X, § 1081(a)(23), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1984; renumbered § 2388, Pub. L. 116–283, div. A, title XVIII, § 1882(b), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 4293.)Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

A prior section 2388 was renumbered section 2922 of this title.

Amendments

2021—Pub. L. 116–283 renumbered section 2410s of this title as this section.

2018—Pub. L. 115–232 struck out period at end of section catchline.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2021 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 116–283 effective Jan. 1, 2022, with additional provisions for delayed implementation and applicability of existing law, see section 1801(d) of Pub. L. 116–283, set out as a note preceding section 3001 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1986–1992 · leading case: New England Tank Indus. of New Hampshire, Inc. v. The United States, 861 F.2d 685 (Fed. Cir. 1989).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

New England Tank Indus. of New Hampshire, Inc. v. The United States, 861 F.2d 685 (Fed. Cir. 1989). · cites it 2× “In finding 37 the board detailed an Autumn 1974 DFSC memorandum: The memorandum observed that the rate schedules and purchase option prices under several long-term, 10 U.S.C. § 2388 service contracts “are extremely low” (i.”

United States v. Lakeshore Terminal & Pipeline Co., 639 F. Supp. 958 (E.D. Mich. 1986). “See 10 U.S.C. § 2388 . Recognizing the commercial impracticality of locating petroleum storage facilities in rural areas, the United States provided the incentives necessary to induce private construction of such facilities by entering into long term contracts.”

United States v. 14.87 Acre of Land, More or Less, 799 F. Supp. 226 (D.N.H. 1992). · cites it 3× “In 1956, to induce the commercial petroleum industry to build facilities where the DOD needed them, Congress passed 10 U.S.C. § 2388 . Section 2388 authorized long term contracts for the necessary fuel services, and permitted the use of an option to purchase the facility at the…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.