<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ask Your Clearance Questions: Part 5</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/gettingupdating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5</link>
	<description>Defense jobs, security clearance jobs, and intelligence jobs, industry news, and security clearance advice for the security cleared professional</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 20:47:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Henderson</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-25650</link>
		<dc:creator>William Henderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 21:11:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-25650</guid>
		<description>Buck:
It&#039;s great that you cleaned up your debts before you applied for the clearance.  Your past financial delinquencies could still result in an interim clearance denial.  Your chances of getting a final clearance will depend on why you were previously delinquent and what changes you have made in your life to preclude future financial problems.  If you haven&#039;t already, take a look at the two articles posted at http://www.clearancejobs.com/index.php?action=candidates for more info on clearances and financial matters.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Buck:<br />
It&#8217;s great that you cleaned up your debts before you applied for the clearance.  Your past financial delinquencies could still result in an interim clearance denial.  Your chances of getting a final clearance will depend on why you were previously delinquent and what changes you have made in your life to preclude future financial problems.  If you haven&#8217;t already, take a look at the two articles posted at <a href="http://www.clearancejobs.com/index.php?action=candidates" rel="nofollow">http://www.clearancejobs.com/index.php?action=candidates</a> for more info on clearances and financial matters.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Buck</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-25572</link>
		<dc:creator>Buck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 02:53:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-25572</guid>
		<description>I have applied and been interviewed for a TSA position at a nearby airport that requires a security clearance.  My credit report needed some rehabilitation, which has been done.  Everything is either paid off, closed, or is up-to-date and current.  

After I got that pretty much squared away, in February I learned that my wife had not paid our federal taxes in five of the last eight years.  Needless to say I was not pleased.  Not at all.  

Anyhow, bottom line, I contacted the IRS and we got all of the returns filed and paid in full.  There are not, nor have there been, any liens, etc., against any property, bank accounts, or anything else.  Everything is supposedly squared away (according to them, anyway).

My BI was supposedly initiated last week.  The natural question is, will either of these issues affect me being granted the clearance and therefore getting the job?

Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have applied and been interviewed for a TSA position at a nearby airport that requires a security clearance.  My credit report needed some rehabilitation, which has been done.  Everything is either paid off, closed, or is up-to-date and current.  </p>
<p>After I got that pretty much squared away, in February I learned that my wife had not paid our federal taxes in five of the last eight years.  Needless to say I was not pleased.  Not at all.  </p>
<p>Anyhow, bottom line, I contacted the IRS and we got all of the returns filed and paid in full.  There are not, nor have there been, any liens, etc., against any property, bank accounts, or anything else.  Everything is supposedly squared away (according to them, anyway).</p>
<p>My BI was supposedly initiated last week.  The natural question is, will either of these issues affect me being granted the clearance and therefore getting the job?</p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Henderson</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-25013</link>
		<dc:creator>William Henderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 23:38:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-25013</guid>
		<description>HMPayne:
Security clearance denials are first rebutted and if unsuccessful, then appealed. It&#039;s a long process before the final decision is made.

Sorry, but the rest of your question is outside my area of knowledge, so I canâ€™t provide any useful info.  Perhaps someone else on this blog has some insight.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>HMPayne:<br />
Security clearance denials are first rebutted and if unsuccessful, then appealed. It&#8217;s a long process before the final decision is made.</p>
<p>Sorry, but the rest of your question is outside my area of knowledge, so I canâ€™t provide any useful info.  Perhaps someone else on this blog has some insight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: HMPayne</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24733</link>
		<dc:creator>HMPayne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2008 13:03:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24733</guid>
		<description>If I&#039;m hired for a civilian Army position based upon a signed security waiver, can I still be fired, if for some reason I&#039;m ultimately rejected for a TS security clearance? I certainly don&#039;t forsee this happening but if rejected then are there any other avenues besides being let go? 
Can one appeal this decision and stay employed or search for other employment until the decision is final?
Would the Government allow an individual to transfer to another agency (if opportunities exist) rather than going unemployed?
Would this be considered a break in service if you needed some time to find another civilian job?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If I&#8217;m hired for a civilian Army position based upon a signed security waiver, can I still be fired, if for some reason I&#8217;m ultimately rejected for a TS security clearance? I certainly don&#8217;t forsee this happening but if rejected then are there any other avenues besides being let go?<br />
Can one appeal this decision and stay employed or search for other employment until the decision is final?<br />
Would the Government allow an individual to transfer to another agency (if opportunities exist) rather than going unemployed?<br />
Would this be considered a break in service if you needed some time to find another civilian job?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Henderson</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24675</link>
		<dc:creator>William Henderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2008 04:59:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24675</guid>
		<description>Jim B:
There is no interview upgrading an interim Secret clearance to a Secret clearance.  In fact there is no routine interview for a Secret clearance.  So your interview was a SPIN (Special Interview) to address some matter of security or suitability concern.  One one exception to this would be if you were being considered for both a Secret clearance and a Public Trust clearance.

Average processing time for non-issue cases for TS/SCI ranges from about 3 to 6 months depending on the agency involved (according to government figures).  However, I don&#039;t believe these numbers.  NRO is claiming that their end-to-end processing for the top 85 percent of their TS/SCI cases in FY07 was 35 days.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jim B:<br />
There is no interview upgrading an interim Secret clearance to a Secret clearance.  In fact there is no routine interview for a Secret clearance.  So your interview was a SPIN (Special Interview) to address some matter of security or suitability concern.  One one exception to this would be if you were being considered for both a Secret clearance and a Public Trust clearance.</p>
<p>Average processing time for non-issue cases for TS/SCI ranges from about 3 to 6 months depending on the agency involved (according to government figures).  However, I don&#8217;t believe these numbers.  NRO is claiming that their end-to-end processing for the top 85 percent of their TS/SCI cases in FY07 was 35 days.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim B</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24589</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 19:21:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24589</guid>
		<description>I am currently working under an interim Secret clearance issued Jan. 2008.  OMB investigator met with me in early April 2008 for upgrading that to Secret.  I held a TS/SCI with DOS up until 1996.  In 1997 I moved to Chile for a US based company.  I have had contact with various Chilean citizens and government people in the course of my work there.  No drug or financial problems.  I am now being considered for a TS/SCI job here in Washington.  What is the normal processing time for a TS/SCI - assuming no problems but with substantial foreign residency/travel (no contact with any organizations or persons who might be considered as threats to the US).
Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am currently working under an interim Secret clearance issued Jan. 2008.  OMB investigator met with me in early April 2008 for upgrading that to Secret.  I held a TS/SCI with DOS up until 1996.  In 1997 I moved to Chile for a US based company.  I have had contact with various Chilean citizens and government people in the course of my work there.  No drug or financial problems.  I am now being considered for a TS/SCI job here in Washington.  What is the normal processing time for a TS/SCI &#8211; assuming no problems but with substantial foreign residency/travel (no contact with any organizations or persons who might be considered as threats to the US).<br />
Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Henderson</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24141</link>
		<dc:creator>William Henderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:44:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24141</guid>
		<description>Sorp:
No one at a government agency will care whether or not you request a copy of your investigation.

There is nothing you can do about things others say about you, regardless of whether or not it is true.  If incorrect information was relied upon to make an adverse decision, then you could rebut it through the normal rebuttal process. When someone provides unfavorable information, it is standard procedure for the investigator to pursue the issue and attempt to corroborate or refute the information through other sources. Uncorroborated non-record information should never be relied upon by an adjudicator to deny or revoke a clearance.

The only time an adjudicator should reach back to an old report is when the original clearance was issued with an &quot;exception&quot; or when a issue surfaces during a new investigation that should have been covered in the prior investigation.  Unless an old issue involves &quot;foreign influence&quot; it will probably have no effect on a future SCI eligibility determination.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorp:<br />
No one at a government agency will care whether or not you request a copy of your investigation.</p>
<p>There is nothing you can do about things others say about you, regardless of whether or not it is true.  If incorrect information was relied upon to make an adverse decision, then you could rebut it through the normal rebuttal process. When someone provides unfavorable information, it is standard procedure for the investigator to pursue the issue and attempt to corroborate or refute the information through other sources. Uncorroborated non-record information should never be relied upon by an adjudicator to deny or revoke a clearance.</p>
<p>The only time an adjudicator should reach back to an old report is when the original clearance was issued with an &#8220;exception&#8221; or when a issue surfaces during a new investigation that should have been covered in the prior investigation.  Unless an old issue involves &#8220;foreign influence&#8221; it will probably have no effect on a future SCI eligibility determination.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scorp</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24128</link>
		<dc:creator>Scorp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Apr 2008 11:01:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24128</guid>
		<description>To be more specific, suppose that someone with an unreliable personality happened to be a source and said something untrue, maybe because of bad memory.  It goes into the report.  The collateral clearance is granted because this is minor and anyway there are plenty of mitigating factors.  But still, it&#039;s not something that should be on the report on the first place (if evidence can be provided to the contrary) because of its effect on future renewals or SAP or SCI.  I wonder if there is a process by which unreliable information can be brought to someone&#039;s attention and corrected if the collateral clearance was granted after all.  This is nothing that happened to me, just strikes my curiosity if there is a provision for this process.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To be more specific, suppose that someone with an unreliable personality happened to be a source and said something untrue, maybe because of bad memory.  It goes into the report.  The collateral clearance is granted because this is minor and anyway there are plenty of mitigating factors.  But still, it&#8217;s not something that should be on the report on the first place (if evidence can be provided to the contrary) because of its effect on future renewals or SAP or SCI.  I wonder if there is a process by which unreliable information can be brought to someone&#8217;s attention and corrected if the collateral clearance was granted after all.  This is nothing that happened to me, just strikes my curiosity if there is a provision for this process.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scorp</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24127</link>
		<dc:creator>Scorp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Apr 2008 10:26:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24127</guid>
		<description>Interesting, I didn&#039;t know that you could get your own report.  Or at least this fact is not heavily advertised.  If the clearance is granted and in active status I wonder if it would also be a good idea to get a copy of the report or if this would make the agency think you&#039;re poking around too much into their process evaluating yourself, if that makes any sense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting, I didn&#8217;t know that you could get your own report.  Or at least this fact is not heavily advertised.  If the clearance is granted and in active status I wonder if it would also be a good idea to get a copy of the report or if this would make the agency think you&#8217;re poking around too much into their process evaluating yourself, if that makes any sense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Henderson</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24115</link>
		<dc:creator>William Henderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Apr 2008 01:08:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24115</guid>
		<description>Scorp:
The investigative reports are protected under the Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts (FOIPA).  You have a right to a copy of your own complete investigative file (minus any confidential source information and any medical information a doctor says should not be released directly to you).  You can only request the report after the investigation is completed.  Anyone who has received a Statement of Reason (explaining why the clearance may be denied) and intends to rebut the SOR would be foolish not to get a copy. I believe that almost all government agencies responsible for these investigation have instructions on their websites for obtain reports under the FOIPA.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scorp:<br />
The investigative reports are protected under the Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts (FOIPA).  You have a right to a copy of your own complete investigative file (minus any confidential source information and any medical information a doctor says should not be released directly to you).  You can only request the report after the investigation is completed.  Anyone who has received a Statement of Reason (explaining why the clearance may be denied) and intends to rebut the SOR would be foolish not to get a copy. I believe that almost all government agencies responsible for these investigation have instructions on their websites for obtain reports under the FOIPA.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scorp</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24101</link>
		<dc:creator>Scorp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2008 19:40:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24101</guid>
		<description>William, excellent advice.  I have another question about the SSBI that I can&#039;t seem to find anywhere.  Sources are not always accurate, something I learned from newspaper reporters quoting sources.  When the background report is written is it possible for the applicant to find out what&#039;s inside the report to have the chance to show evidence that would clarify something that was written?  I&#039;ve seen the background investigation reports published on the web as part of the appeals process, so apparently these reports can be made public.  But, maybe it would be unwise to request one&#039;s own report, I am not sure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>William, excellent advice.  I have another question about the SSBI that I can&#8217;t seem to find anywhere.  Sources are not always accurate, something I learned from newspaper reporters quoting sources.  When the background report is written is it possible for the applicant to find out what&#8217;s inside the report to have the chance to show evidence that would clarify something that was written?  I&#8217;ve seen the background investigation reports published on the web as part of the appeals process, so apparently these reports can be made public.  But, maybe it would be unwise to request one&#8217;s own report, I am not sure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Henderson</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24065</link>
		<dc:creator>William Henderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2008 02:33:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24065</guid>
		<description>Sorry, that&#039;s anecdotal, not antecodal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry, that&#8217;s anecdotal, not antecodal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Henderson</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24052</link>
		<dc:creator>William Henderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 22:14:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24052</guid>
		<description>Scorp:
A waiver will not even be considered without a â€œCertification of a Compelling Need.â€  Only the Facility Security Officer or Program Security Officer at the company that gave you the job offer can tell you what their experiences have been in the past with the Govt Agency they are dealing with.  There is no statistical data available, only antecodal information and the antecodal info would only be applicable to the specific govt agency granting the SCI and the specific contractor/program it was requested for.  The FSO/PSO would have the most recent info on this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scorp:<br />
A waiver will not even be considered without a â€œCertification of a Compelling Need.â€  Only the Facility Security Officer or Program Security Officer at the company that gave you the job offer can tell you what their experiences have been in the past with the Govt Agency they are dealing with.  There is no statistical data available, only antecodal information and the antecodal info would only be applicable to the specific govt agency granting the SCI and the specific contractor/program it was requested for.  The FSO/PSO would have the most recent info on this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scorp</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24040</link>
		<dc:creator>Scorp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:38:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24040</guid>
		<description>William, thanks very much for the answer: &quot;However for SCI eligibility, current DNI/CIA regulations prohibit granting SCI to anyone who has immediate family members (including spouse or cohabitant) who are not US citizens. It is possible to get a waiver.&quot;  

If there is a job offer that is contingent on SCI and the spouse still has 1 year remaining to US citizenship, does the waiver process typically add a long time to the normal SCI processing time?  i.e. If the boss is expecting work to start after 3 months doing alternate non-SCI projects while waiting for adjudication, is the waiver process most likely going to delay the start of the real work?  Is it difficult to get a waiver for a foreign spouse when the applicant otherwise has an exsiting TS SSBI with a very clean background?  In this case should the applicant just forget about this job opportunity because of small chances?  Or go for it anyway because there is a &quot;reasonable&quot; chance of a waiver?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>William, thanks very much for the answer: &#8220;However for SCI eligibility, current DNI/CIA regulations prohibit granting SCI to anyone who has immediate family members (including spouse or cohabitant) who are not US citizens. It is possible to get a waiver.&#8221;  </p>
<p>If there is a job offer that is contingent on SCI and the spouse still has 1 year remaining to US citizenship, does the waiver process typically add a long time to the normal SCI processing time?  i.e. If the boss is expecting work to start after 3 months doing alternate non-SCI projects while waiting for adjudication, is the waiver process most likely going to delay the start of the real work?  Is it difficult to get a waiver for a foreign spouse when the applicant otherwise has an exsiting TS SSBI with a very clean background?  In this case should the applicant just forget about this job opportunity because of small chances?  Or go for it anyway because there is a &#8220;reasonable&#8221; chance of a waiver?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Henderson</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24035</link>
		<dc:creator>William Henderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:44:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24035</guid>
		<description>Sam:
There are requirements for certain types and numbers reference interviews in an SSBI for a TS clearance. But many of the reference interviews can be conducted with people that are not listed on the SF86.  Actually this is preferred.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sam:<br />
There are requirements for certain types and numbers reference interviews in an SSBI for a TS clearance. But many of the reference interviews can be conducted with people that are not listed on the SF86.  Actually this is preferred.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Henderson</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24034</link>
		<dc:creator>William Henderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:40:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24034</guid>
		<description>CIS:
FBI name checks for CIS purposes are handled separately from those conducted for security clearances, so the backlog is much shorter for security clearances.  These usually take from 30 to 60 days.  Something has probably slipped through the cracks in your case, because the FBI name &amp; technical fingerprint search should have been requested as soon as your case was opened.   I am also confused by the fact that you had an interview with an investigator.  The investigation for a Secret clearance (in your case a NACLC)  does not include a routine Subject Interview.  However if you are being considered for both a Secret Clearance and a Public Trust position, there would be a routine Subject Interview.

I wouldnâ€™t contact a congressman until you give your security manager a chance to find out what happened.  If the FBI check was not requested last fall as it should have been, then itâ€™s best to just wait.  If the FBI check was requested last fall and is still pending and your security manager and/or OPM promises to do something about it, give them 30 days before going outside your agency for help.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>CIS:<br />
FBI name checks for CIS purposes are handled separately from those conducted for security clearances, so the backlog is much shorter for security clearances.  These usually take from 30 to 60 days.  Something has probably slipped through the cracks in your case, because the FBI name &amp; technical fingerprint search should have been requested as soon as your case was opened.   I am also confused by the fact that you had an interview with an investigator.  The investigation for a Secret clearance (in your case a NACLC)  does not include a routine Subject Interview.  However if you are being considered for both a Secret Clearance and a Public Trust position, there would be a routine Subject Interview.</p>
<p>I wouldnâ€™t contact a congressman until you give your security manager a chance to find out what happened.  If the FBI check was not requested last fall as it should have been, then itâ€™s best to just wait.  If the FBI check was requested last fall and is still pending and your security manager and/or OPM promises to do something about it, give them 30 days before going outside your agency for help.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24030</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:24:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24030</guid>
		<description>Thank you Mr. Henderson.  I guess I can&#039;t assume my investigation is done, but it&#039;s nice to know lacking interviews doesn&#039;t necessarily mean I&#039;m way behind.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you Mr. Henderson.  I guess I can&#8217;t assume my investigation is done, but it&#8217;s nice to know lacking interviews doesn&#8217;t necessarily mean I&#8217;m way behind.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Henderson</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24029</link>
		<dc:creator>William Henderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:21:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24029</guid>
		<description>RSV:
There is no secret number of â€œyesâ€ responses before a clearance is denied.  The most frequently cited reason for denying a clearance is intentionally providing false information during the clearance process.  With regard to past illegal drug use, see my 30 March 2008 11:18 PM post in this threat about illegal drug involvement vs. passage of time.  Almost all security/suitability issues can be mitigated, including mutiple issues.

Because you are applying for a TS clearance, your investigation will include a Personal Subject Interviewâ€”PRSI.â€  You should prepare yourself for this interview by reviewing all mitigating factors in the Adjudicative Guidelines under each guideline that applies to you including â€œPersonal Conductâ€ which is a catch-all for multiple minor issues.  If an interim TS clearance is important in your case, you should include as much mitigating information on your SF86 as possible, otherwise only mention them briefly and expand on them during the PRSI.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RSV:<br />
There is no secret number of â€œyesâ€ responses before a clearance is denied.  The most frequently cited reason for denying a clearance is intentionally providing false information during the clearance process.  With regard to past illegal drug use, see my 30 March 2008 11:18 PM post in this threat about illegal drug involvement vs. passage of time.  Almost all security/suitability issues can be mitigated, including mutiple issues.</p>
<p>Because you are applying for a TS clearance, your investigation will include a Personal Subject Interviewâ€”PRSI.â€  You should prepare yourself for this interview by reviewing all mitigating factors in the Adjudicative Guidelines under each guideline that applies to you including â€œPersonal Conductâ€ which is a catch-all for multiple minor issues.  If an interim TS clearance is important in your case, you should include as much mitigating information on your SF86 as possible, otherwise only mention them briefly and expand on them during the PRSI.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Henderson</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24027</link>
		<dc:creator>William Henderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:05:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24027</guid>
		<description>Geoffrey:
Your chances of getting a security clearance are very poor. See my 30 March 2008 11:18 PM post in this threat about illegal drug involvement vs. passage of time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Geoffrey:<br />
Your chances of getting a security clearance are very poor. See my 30 March 2008 11:18 PM post in this threat about illegal drug involvement vs. passage of time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Henderson</title>
		<link>http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/getting-updating-a-clearance/ask-your-clearance-questions-part-5/comment-page-5/#comment-24026</link>
		<dc:creator>William Henderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 17:58:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clearancejobsblog.com/?p=44#comment-24026</guid>
		<description>Sam:

Investigators are required to destroy their field records a certain number of days after they have submitted their report.  This is an administrative policy.  It allows enough time to insure that the completed ungarbled report reached the â€œcase controlâ€ office of the government agency conducting the investigation (not the adjudicative agency).  One investigator could submit his report three months before another investigator in a different location.  Consequently field records in one location could be destroyed/deleted long before the investigation is completed and sent to the adjudicative facility.

The only people listed on your SF86 that must be interviewed (and there are exceptions to this rule) are your past supervisors.  Everyone else is optional.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sam:</p>
<p>Investigators are required to destroy their field records a certain number of days after they have submitted their report.  This is an administrative policy.  It allows enough time to insure that the completed ungarbled report reached the â€œcase controlâ€ office of the government agency conducting the investigation (not the adjudicative agency).  One investigator could submit his report three months before another investigator in a different location.  Consequently field records in one location could be destroyed/deleted long before the investigation is completed and sent to the adjudicative facility.</p>
<p>The only people listed on your SF86 that must be interviewed (and there are exceptions to this rule) are your past supervisors.  Everyone else is optional.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

