April 2010
Monthly Archive
Monthly Archive
Posted by William Henderson on 22 Apr 2010 | Tagged as: Cleared News, Getting/Updating a Clearance, Security-Cleared Career Advice
On March 10, 2010 the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved a new version of the Standard Form 86—SF86 (Questionnaire for National Security Positions). The only description of the new form currently available is a PDF file, consisting of 453 pages of explanations and screen shots of the eQIP version, posted at the reginfo.gov website. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has not yet posted the new form at their website. The last revision of the SF86 was approved in July 2008. OPM did not post that version of the form on their website until October 2008 and the eQIP version was not available for use by contractors until January 2009.
The new March 2010 version of the SF86 is considerably different and longer than the version submitted for public comment in September 2009. That version was described on this blog at “OPM Submits New SF86 for Review” in October 2009. Major changes now include:
These changes are in line with the Joint Security and Suitability Reform Team’s (JSSRT) planned expansion of upfront comprehensive follow-up questions necessary to enhance the collection of subject-reported information as early as possible in the investigative process. Answers to the new and expanded questions represent information that would otherwise have to be obtained during a Subject Interview by an investigator and will result in shorter Subject Interview times for applicants with complicated personal histories.
Posted by Eric Pecinovsky on 12 Apr 2010 | Tagged as: Cleared Jobs, Investigations
At first, it looked like 62 workers at Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS)’s military payroll accounting facility in Cleveland, Ohio would lose their jobs due to credit problems. In the past, other DFAS workers in Columbus and Indianapolis had lost jobs because of credit issues. The Cleveland facility processes pay for active Navy personnel, military retirees, and government officials, including the President.
After some lobbying by local members of Congress, an article in The Plain Dealer explains what happened next…
“The Defense Finance and Accounting Service has agreed to suspend a controversial policy of firing workers for credit reasons while it reviews whether it was necessary to upgrade their security clearances in 2005. The announcement gives a temporary reprieve to 47 workers who were about to lose their jobs.”
“DFAS spokesman Tom LaRock said that since 2001, 54 employees from all DFAS offices have been terminated for not being able to obtain a favorable background clearance…All DFAS positions are classified as sensitive, LaRock said. Because they process people’s pay, employees have access to social security numbers, bank accounts and other sensitive information, he said.”
“It is not top secret or confidential,” he said. “It is considered a background clearance.”
Posted by Eric Pecinovsky on 09 Apr 2010 | Tagged as: Cleared Jobs, Cleared News
The U.S. State Department is investigating an employee with top-secret security clearance who government investigators say mishandled classified information related to national security, according to an article on FoxNews.com.
“Eugene Reginald Hopson, a 30-year veteran of the State Department, described as an information management officer, oversaw the handling and security of classified information in U.S. embassies.
He was stripped of his security clearance and ordered back to Washington in October after 12 years overseas when State Department special agents found he had unauthorized possession of classified materials, according to an affidavit filed in the case.
A January search of his household belongings yielded five U.S. diplomatic passports, one Bolivian passport and evidence of bank accounts in Honduras, Italy and the Cayman Islands, search warrants show.”
The article goes on to state that The State Department confirmed that an investigation is underway, however, no charges have been filed. There are two laws that he possibly violated, one prohibiting “unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents” and the other on “gross negligence”, allowing classified information to be removed from its “proper place of custody“.