Security Clearance Jobs Blog

Our popular ongoing series allows you to ask your most complex questions regarding security clearances and our regular contributors of present and former clearance investigators and adjudicators will try to answer them. The rules are listed below. Failure to abide by them will mean your question will be deleted.

NOTE: Due to the volume of questions we receive, we cannot answer all of them. Selected questions that have not been answered in the past will likely be answered.

If you would like a guaranteed private answer to your question, please see here.

Note: All questions are moderated. After you post, it can take up to a week for the question to be “live” on the site and our panelists to see it and answer it.

1. Please do not address a contributor by name to ensure anyone who has knowledge might answer.
2. Do not include your own name, email address, or other information that can identify you. This is a public forum and clearance holders have a responsibility for covertness.
3. If you have questions regarding careers, job hunting, salaries, interviewing, or other career-related topics, see the other threads dedicated to this purpose.
4. Provide full details about your case in your initial question thread.
5. Do not post your questions in previous versions of this thread.
6. Understand that the suggestions and comments contributors provide are their opinions only. The owners of this site are not responsible for the suggestions and guidance from outside contributors.

Note: If your post does not appear on this site, you may not be following the rules above.

If you would like a guaranteed private answer to your question, please see here.

Please read over previous threads to see if your question has already been answered. Use the Search tool to locate specific keywords.

Related Articles:

• Employment Suitability Versus Security Clearance
• Criminal Conduct and Security Clearances
• Drug Involvement and Security Clearances
• Rebutting and Appealing Security Clearance Denials
• Alcohol Consumption and Security Clearances
• Personal Finances and Security Clearances

80 Comments »

A June 15, 2010 article, “Buzz on lie detectors is a lie, NSA video says,” at WashingtonPost.com reported on a new 10-minute video about polygraph tests posted at the Defense Security Service’s (DSS) training website. “The Truth About the Polygraph” is reported to be a video produced by the National Security Agency (NSA) designed to reduce the anxiety applicants feel about the examination.

The DSS Academy website provides the following comments regarding the video. An accompanying 2-page brochure is also available:

Many positions of trust with the U.S. Government require candidates to undergo a polygraph examination. This video, aimed at either current or prospective employees, provides an overview of the process that may be encountered when a polygraph examination is required for employment or access to sensitive information.

Neither the DSS Academy website nor the video itself provided any information about the production of the video.

It’s difficult to make any general statements about the manner in which polygraph tests for security clearance applicant screening are conducted. Although, all federal polygraph examiners are trained at the Defense Academy for Credibility Assessment—DACA (formerly known as the DOD Polygraph Institute); examiners develop their own individual style that’s usually influenced by their organization’s culture.

Truth About the Polygraph Brochure [pdf] | The Truth About the Polygraph [flash video]

3 Comments »

Over the past two years, ClearanceJobsBlog.com has become the only place on the internet where people can ask tough questions about security clearances and get expert answers. Our staff and regular contributors have taken the time to answer even the most complex questions and give people peace of mind and assistance for an inherently confusing topic. We greatly appreciate all of the input.

This premium service is offered to you at only $40 per question and answer.

Due to popular demand and our rapid growth, we are launching a new private security clearance question and answer service. This will help ensure your critical questions get answers. Our new service grants the following:

• Complete privacy – your questions answered out of public view
• Priority service – your questions get answered first, before our blog and with no delays
• Complete answers – your questions receive detailed answers with references and links where applicable
• Guaranteed answers - your questions are guaranteed to be answered

Your questions will be answered by our resident expert, William H. Henderson, author of The Security Clearance Manual.  Mr. Henderson is a retired federal investigator who worked as a field agent and supervisor for the Defense Investigative Service (DIS) and its successor organizations, the Defense Security Service (DSS) and the Federal Investigative Services Division of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) for over 20 years.

This premium service is offered to you at only $40 per question and answer.

Instructions:

1. Email your question to clearancehelp@clearancejobs.com
2. Include full contact details including your name, address, and phone number
3. Ensure your question is fully detailed – the more information the better
4. Cost is $40 per question and answer.
5. You will receive an email receipt and questions will be subsequently answered.
6. Questions will be answered from the email address provided.
7. Click the Buy Now button link below to proceed with payment.

5 Comments »

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:

• Purpose of this form—“This form may also be used by agencies in determining whether a subject performing work for, or on behalf of, the Government under a contract should be deemed eligible for logical or physical access when the nature of the work to be performed is sensitive and could bring about an adverse effect on the national security.”
• History of residences, schools, and employment require 10 years of information for all levels of clearances.
• Many new and expanded questions were added regarding foreign connections, foreign involvement, and foreign travel.
• Reportable foreign associates now include those with whom you are bound by a “common interest” (a significant change that may affect social media contacts).
• New and expanded questions were added regarding financial records, police records, drugs, alcohol, and mental health.

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.

27 Comments »

In February 2010 the U.S. House of Representatives passed their version (HR 2701) of the Intelligence Authorization Act for fiscal year 2010.  The Senate passed their version (S.1494) in September 2009.  Hopefully the two versions will be reconciled, passed by Congress, and sent to the President.

The House version creates an Ombudsman for Intelligence Community (IC) security clearances in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and requires each IC agency to provide contact information for the ombudsman to all clearance applicants.

The House version also requires the President to submit to Congress within 180 days of enactment a report that includes the feasibility, counterintelligence risk, and cost effectiveness of –

• by not later than January 1, 2012, requiring the investigation and adjudication of security clearances to be conducted by not more than two Federal agencies; and

• by not later than January 1, 2015, requiring the investigation and adjudication of security clearance to be conducted by not more than one Federal agency.

Both the creation of an ombudsman for IC clearances and a formal study on reducing the number of investigative and adjudicative agencies seem like excellent ideas.  Both could result in improving clearance reciprocity.  The last time an Intelligence Authorization Act became law was in December 2004.  The ones since then have either died in Congress or been successfully vetoed.  So, this may not be the best vehicle to further these two ideas.

8 Comments »

The FBI released a statement and politico reported that a former FBI contract linguist pleaded guilty to unlawfully providing classified documents to the host of an Internet blog who then published information derived from those documents on the blog.

Shamai Kedem Leibowitz, a.k.a., Samuel Shamai Leibowitz, 39, of Silver Spring, Maryland, pleaded guilty in federal court to a one-count information charging him with knowingly and willfully disclosing to an unauthorized person five FBI documents classified at the “Secret” level that contained classified information concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States.  Under the plea agreement, the government and Leibowitz have agreed that a term of 20 months imprisonment is the appropriate sentence in this case.

From January 2009 through August 2009, Leibowitz was employed by the FBI as a contract linguist in an office in Calverton, Maryland.  Leibowitz held a Top Secret security clearance and is an Israeli American dual citizen. More from Politico…

“After news of the charges against him broke, it took reporters only minutes to track down news articles reporting that Leibowitz was fired from a legal clerkship in Israel and was publicly chastised by an Israeli Supreme Court justice for leaking a judge’s private comments…

Experts were also puzzled that someone with a long history of public activism on polarizing issues would wind up working for U.S. law enforcement in a classified environment and be granted access to sensitive information…

Some lawyers said the top-secret clearance awarded to Leibowitz, who describes himself as an Israeli-American, was particularly puzzling because Americans who are also Israeli citizens frequently face clearance denials and delays because of concerns they might harbor an allegiance to Israel.”

The FBI said it would look at whether the clearance process was handled properly.

Does this signal a breakdown in the security clearance process?

Related Article: Dual Citizenship And Security Clearances, Foreign Influence and Security Clearances

3 Comments »

The quest to speed up the security clearance process continues with several Senators introducing the Security Clearance Modernization and Reporting Act of 2009 yesterday.

Overall the bill’s goal is similar to the Executive Order 13467 President Bush signed in June 2008 and would codify many of those provisions.

An article in NextGov goes on to say that the bill would:

• “mandate the creation of a performance accountability council to oversee the reduction of the government’s security clearance backlog and extends reporting requirements.”
• director of OMB will submit an IT strategy to Congress within 120 days of the bill’s enactment to speed up the security clearance process.
• “agencies would have to continue reporting to Congress on their progress in improving the security clearance process until two years after GAO removes the program from the high-risk list.”

“As for reciprocal recognition of security clearances among agencies, the legislation, a Senate Democratic committee aide said the bill “reemphasizes” that requirement. “We were getting the sense that not everyone was following the intent, as we saw it, of what reciprocal recognition was,” the staffer said.”

Related Articles: Security Clearance Reciprocity of Special Access Eligibility

6 Comments »

On November 20, 2009 the Defense Security Service issued the following policy alert entitled, “Foreign Passport: Disposition Influences Personnel Clearance Eligibility.”

DISCO will not grant or continue a personnel clearance if the clearance applicant or cleared individual possesses a current foreign passport. In instances where the foreign passport is the sole potential disqualifying factor in the personnel clearance adjudication, DISCO will send a Joint Personnel Adjudication System (JPAS) message to the Facility Security Officer (FSO) stating that if DISCO receives reliable documentary evidence that the foreign passport has been destroyed, invalidated, or surrendered, DISCO will grant or continue the clearance. The passport holder may surrender the foreign passport to the FSO for safekeeping, but the FSO is not required to perform this service. . . .

Related Articles: Dual Citizenship And Security Clearances, Foreign Influence and Security Clearances

2 Comments »

“Failure to provide truthful and candid answers during the security clearance process” is one of the most common reasons for the denial or revocation of security clearances.

Of the approximately 1,300 security clearance cases decided by Administrative Judges of the Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) during fiscal year 2008, Personal Conduct was the second most frequently cited issue and appeared in 497 (38%) of the cases. It was almost always cited due to applicants concealing information related to one of the other issues, such as criminal conduct, drug involvement, and alcohol consumption.

In recent years the misrepresentation of educational qualifications has gained increased importance in security clearance investigations and adjudication. Previously educational degrees were merely verified. Today the bona fides of questionable post-secondary schools are being scrutinized.

Unfortunately in many falsification cases, the information the applicant tried to conceal would not have resulted in a clearance denial…read more.

3 Comments »

Amid growing unemployment, foreclosure and delinquency rates are spiking.  We thought it would be a good time to revisit how a person’s personal financial situation can affect their  security clearance.

A sampling of Defense Office of Hearing and Appeals (DOHA) security clearance hearings showed (in 2007, just when the recession was taking hold) that about 50% of clearance denials involved “Financial Considerations”

Since delinquent debt is by far the most common financial concern, we published several articles on this very topic entitled; The Impact of Delinquent Debt on Security Clearances, What To Do If You Have Delinquent Debt, Explaining Delinquent Debt on the SF-86, Delinquent Debt and Interim Clearance, as well as several blog posts.

5 Comments »

On September 30, 2009 the Federal Register announced that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has submitted a proposed revision of Standard Form 86 (SF86), Questionnaire for National Security Positions, for 30-day public review and comment.

The current version of the SF86 (July 2008) has only been in use for about a year and changed the previous version (September 1995) by adding a new section on “Use of Information Technology Systems” and expanding the sections on “Foreign Contacts,” “Foreign Activities,” “Financial Record,” “Use of Alcohol,” and “Association Record.”

The new proposed revision of the SF86 eliminates all references to the SSBI and its requirement for 10 years worth of information. Questions are limited to 7 years, except for those that ask “have your ever.” The proposed SF86 also expands on questions regarding dual citizenship, foreign activities, mental health, and police record. OPM issued a Matrix of Changes between the current and proposed versions.

Here are some proposed changes:

• Employment Record: The questions “Left a job for other reasons under unfavorable circumstances” and “Laid off from job by employer” were eliminated.

• People Who Know You Well: Reference coverage reduced from 7 years to 5 years.

• Financial Record: (1) Current and past delinquent debt changed to 120 days (were 90 days and 180 days, respectively). (2) Current credit counseling question added.

• Police Record: (1) Offenses involving firearms, explosive, drugs and alcohol limited to 7 years. (2) New questions on domestic violence offenses and protective orders. (3) New question on current or past probation or parole. (4) Question regarding felony charges replaced by question about convictions resulting in a sentence of one year or more in prison.

15 Comments »

When your job responsibilities include overseeing nearly $1 billion in research for the Missile Defense Agency, Department of Homeland Security, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), and other intelligence agencies, the chances are you’re going to need security clearance to get a peek inside.

The Applied Physics Lab at Johns Hopkins University is overseen by the University’s President, Ronald Daniels, who is Canadian.

The article in the Baltimore Sun went on to say that the University had to use some creative thinking to keep the Lab’s government funding; with the creation of a Limited Liability Corp. (LLC) and the university’s board of trustees chairman overseeing the Lab.

Related Article:  Foreign Influence and Security Clearances

Comments Off

On September 15, 2009 a hearing was held before a Senate subcommittee responsible for oversight of the Federal government’s security clearance reform process. Testifying before the subcommittee were representatives of OMB, OPM, DOD, ODNI, and GAO. Transcripts of their prepared statements are posted at the Senate subcommittee’s website.

Here are some highlights from the prepared statements:

• 90% of initial clearance investigations by OPM are done in an average of 37 days.
• Average investigation for a Top Secret clearance now takes 79 days.
• Average investigation for a Secret clearance now takes 47 days.
• Security clearance investigation backlog (cases older than 180 days) has been eliminated.
• E-Adjudication of Secret clearances was implemented for DOD industrial cases in September 2009 (originally planned for May 2009). This capability will be extended to the Air Force and Navy adjudication facilities by December 2009.

Here are some of the lowlights:

• 11% of initial clearance eligibility decisions took more than 300 days to complete in FY08.
• Only 260,000 of the estimated 3 million active security clearances are currently in OPM’s Clearance Verification System.
• The new Federal Investigative Standards that were approved in December 2009 (but not yet implement) will be changed.
• The new SF86, originally expected to be approved by January 2009, won’t even be available for public comment until late September 2009 (a lengthy process required before final approval).
• According to GAO, long-term funding requirements for the reformed process still have not been identified.

27 Comments »

An article in the National Journal covers a security clearance process that is painfully slow at the State Department. For entry level employees at the State Department, especially interns, start dates are moved back waiting for a security clearance.

In most cases, the State Department outsources investigations to contractors, however, when an applicant has lived or traveled extensively overseas, Diplomatic Security takes over the investigation.  The State Department processes 25,000 clearance cases a year and in 3Q of this year, the Bureau of Diplomatic Security needed an average of 54 days to issue entry-level clearances, down from 64 days in 2008.

In addition, the article airs allegations made by the group called Concerned Foreign Service Officers regarding State Department investigators of sometimes practicing ethnic and religious profiling, resulting from insufficient internal checks.

Follow-up: A blog on Foreign Policy published reactions from former State Department interns on this issue.

Quote of the day: “With the clearance process, as an applicant, you don’t know anything…” – State Department would-be intern.

11 Comments »

Our popular ongoing series allows you to ask your most complex questions regarding security clearances and our regular contributors of present and former clearance investigators and adjudicators will try to answer them. The rules are listed below. Failure to abide by them will mean your question will be deleted.

NOTE: Due to the volume of questions we receive, we cannot answer all of them. Selected questions that have not been answered in the past will likely be answered.

If you would like a guaranteed private answer to your question, please see here.

Note: All questions are moderated. After you post, it can take up to a week for the question to be “live” on the site and our panelists to see it and answer it.

1. Please do not address a contributor by name to ensure anyone who has knowledge might answer.
2. Do not include your own name, email address, or other information that can identify you. This is a public forum and clearance holders have a responsibility for covertness.
3. If you have questions regarding careers, job hunting, salaries, interviewing, or other career-related topics, see the other threads dedicated to this purpose.
4. Provide full details about your case in your initial question thread.
5. Do not post your questions in previous versions of this thread.
6. Understand that the suggestions and comments contributors provide are their opinions only. The owners of this site are not responsible for the suggestions and guidance from outside contributors.

Note: If your post does not appear on this site, you may not be following the rules above.

If you would like a guaranteed private answer to your question, please see here.

Please read over previous threads to see if your question has already been answered. Use the Search tool to locate specific keywords.

Related Articles:

• Employment Suitability Versus Security Clearance
• Criminal Conduct and Security Clearances
• Drug Involvement and Security Clearances
• Rebutting and Appealing Security Clearance Denials
• Alcohol Consumption and Security Clearances
• Personal Finances and Security Clearances

96 Comments »