Security Clearance Jobs Blog

This afternoon I posted a brief overview of the already brief annual report on the security clearance process released by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

The meager report is primarily data, leaving analysis to the reader.

The motive for demanding release of this data (I believe) is (1) general oversight of the number of security clearances granted by the government; and (2) that the reporting of investigation lengths serves as a check on agencies.

But only a few years after the 2010 law required the report’s publication, the Senate Intelligence Committee approved the ODNI’s request to axe it altogether.  Eventually oversight groups clamored and the committee backed off.

I’m curious to know:  Do you believe this is an apt accountability mechanism for the security clearance process, or is this report just a perfunctory exercise (and interruption for ODNI) mandated by law?  (And maybe it’s not enough oversight.)  And second, since what’s most important is not the report’s data itself but the conclusions gleaned from the (albeit cursory) information therein, what’s your insight/analysis on the numbers?

4 Comments »

Two recent articles at ClearanceJobs.com note the rise – and importance – of professional security clearance attorneys. If you have a difficult clearance situation, or face the potential of losing your security clearance, chances are you’ll need some kind of professional assistance.

When it comes to getting a job in the intelligence community, it’s understood that most future CIA spies don’t spring from the womb donning a dark tie and sunglasses. A squeaky clean past isn’t a requirement for an intelligence career, but absolute honesty in the application and adjudication process is.

For many in the intelligence community, polygraph screenings are a key place for problems to arise. The security clearance polygraph process is increasingly under fire, and is one area that can leave many potential hires calling for legal advice. A McClatchy News Service report harshly criticized the polygraph process, arguing that employment screenings had uncovered instances of illegal behavior, including the viewing of child porn, and those disclosures weren’t revealed to federal authorities.

But it isn’t that cut and dry, notes Brad Moss, associate counsel at the law office of Mark Zaid, a well-known security clearance attorney. He explains, “The question asked during the polygraph is: ‘Have you ever seen anything pornographic that makes you feel uncomfortable?’ The men say yes, sure—that sometimes gets false flagged as child porn.”

The polygraph process does not offer a lot of opportunity for context – you’re basically battling a computer, and as Jeopardy taught us, that’s a tough battle to win. Nuance is not well understood by a machine.

So, if you decide you need to consult a lawyer, what should you ask in your initial consultation? Here’s a list compiled by ClearanceJobs contributor and security clearance consultant William Henderson:

• What are my chances of being granted a security clearance?
• How many security clearance cases involving an SOR have you had in the last 12 months?
• How many cases resulted in the successful rebuttal of an SOR without going to a hearing?
• How many cases resulted in the granting of a clearance after a hearing?
• Which federal agencies have you dealt with on security clearance cases?
• Who in your office will prepare my case (attorney or paralegal)?
• About how much will your services cost?
• How are your cost and fees calculated?
• How and when will I be required to pay?
• What do you need from me to get started?
• What can I do to help keep the costs and fees down?

Have you ever sought professional help in your clearance process? Did it help?

7 Comments »

In January 2012 a bill was introduced in the Maryland State Senate that proposed a State income tax credit for costs incurred to obtain federal security clearances. The first reading of the bill (SB296) proposed a requirement for “the Governor of Maryland to make a $6,000,000 appropriation in FY2014 and FY21015 for the tax credit, applying the Act to all taxable years beginning after December 31, 2011.” The bill was unclear as to what costs would qualify for the tax credit and who could claim it. Basically it just appropriated money for the tax credit.

News articles originally suggested that the “proposal would offer tax credits worth up to $3,000 or half the cost of the security clearance, whichever is less, to the individual or company paying for it.”  But individuals and companies rarely pay for federal security clearances.  Someone must have educated the sponsors of the bill on this fact, resulting in significant changes to the bill before it was signed into law on May 22, 2012.  Even the title of the bill changed from “Income Tax Credit – Security Clearance Expense” to “Income Tax Credit – Security Clearances – Employer Costs.”

The new law allows employers to claim a Maryland tax credit of up to $100,000 per year for:

(I) Security clearance administrative expenses incurred with regard to an employee in the state including, but not limited to:

1. Processing applications requests for clearances for employees in the state;
2. Maintaining, upgrading, or installing computer systems in the state required to obtain federal security clearances; and
3. Training employees in the state to administer the application process; . . . .

Employers can also claim an annual tax credit of 50% of the costs or $100,000 (whichever is less) for the construction or renovation of a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) located in the state.  If multiple SCIFs are involved, the maximum tax credit is limited $250,000 per year.

The credits will be available for tax years beginning after December 2012, but before January 2017.  Two million dollars in tax credits will be available each year.  If applications for tax credits exceed $2,000,000 per year, the credits will be allocated to employers on a pro-rata basis. 

The law provides the basic procedures for applying for the tax credit, but leaves it to the Maryland Department of Business and Economic Development to craft a regulation that defines the exact nature of administrative expenses that will qualify for the tax credit.

The law will help smaller Maryland companies improve their clearance processing capabilities.  It is particularly timely, since many small cleared defense contractors have not yet purchased electronic fingerprint capture equipment needed by December 2013 to implement the Secure Web Fingerprint Transmission (SWFT) system as required by the Department of Defense for security clearance processing.

No Comments »

Security clearance reciprocity, adjudication timeliness and leveraging technology to increase efficiency were all topics addressed at this week’s Security Clearance Reform hearing on Capitol Hill. Senator Daniel Akaka, Chairman of the Senate’s subcommittee on oversight of government management and the federal workforce, questioned a panel of government leaders on the progress of clearance reforms.

The general consensus was that much progress has been made over the course of the past several years, in moving the security clearance process off of the GAO hot seat and into a position to be, in some ways, a model for similar reform efforts in standardizing government processes. But despite the forward movement, much remains to be done, specifically in the area of reciprocity and communication across agencies.

The Performance Accountability Council (PAC) is responsible for many of the clearance reforms today’s applicants will note, including updating the security clearance application (SF-86) and instituting quality metrics. Today, initial investigations take an average of 44 days, compared to 189 days in 2005, noted Akaka.

Remarks from Gene Dodoro, comptroller general at the U.S. Government Accountability Office, emphasized the progress in security clearance reform as indicated by the removal of the program from the GAO’s high-risk list. Despite forward movement, however, he also emphasized that continued leadership emphasis and public attention would be needed to ensure reform efforts continue.

Dodoro specifically noted the need to reduce redundancy, leverage technology, and conduct an honest assessment of which positions require clearances and what level of clearance is required. “There’s a huge difference in the amount of money that’s used to implement a top secret versus a secret clearance,” Dodoro said.

“For fiscal year 2012 OPM’s standard base prices are $4,005 for an initial investigation of a top secret clearance, $2,711 for an investigation to renew a top secret clearance, and either $228 or $260 for an investigation for a secret clearance. As we reported in February 2012, these base prices can increase if triggered by the circumstances of a case, such as issues related to credit or criminal history checks,” noted Dodoro’s testimony. “Further, the cost of getting and maintaining a top secret clearance for 10 years is almost 30 times greater than the cost of getting and maintaining a secret clearance for the same period.”

Dodoro urged that requesting a lower level clearance when a higher one isn’t needed, as well as evaluating continued need for higher level clearances during periodic reinvestigations would likely result in significant savings for the federal government.

________

Other testimony largely focused on the issue of reciprocity, and leveraging technology to facilitate timely adjudication for personnel, which is deemed both critical to safeguarding classified materials as well as ensuring a quality workforce.

“A timely process is important because delays in processing security clearances can cause delays in placing qualified individuals in the cleared positions that are needed to accomplish our many missions,” said Elizabeth McGrath, deputy chief management officer, U.S. Department of Defense. “In some cases delays may result in highly qualified applicants withdrawing themselves from consideration for positions and the government losing out on these potential key contributors to our workforce.”

When it comes to clearance reciprocity, McGrath made the case for DoD’s Case Adjudication Tracking System (CATS), initially developed by the Army and now in use across the Department of Defense as well as the Department of Energy. McGrath noted that the Social Security administration was set to deploy cats in FY 2013. The CATS e-adjudication capability as greatly reduced the amount of manual processing required, said McGrath.

Merton Miller, associate director of the federal investigative service of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) noted that Electronic Questionnaires for Security Clearance Processing (eQIP) is the “gold standard” for electronic application throughout the federal government and has made a significant impact on clearance processing times and accuracy. OPM currently receives over 99 percent of its applications through e-QIP, Miller noted.

Overall, future clearance reform will focus both on leveraging technology to increase agency reciprocity programs, as well as continued emphasis on the topic of overclassification – both in terms of classified materials themselves, as well as the numbers of cleared personnel.

78 Comments »

If you ask around the common perception seems to be that getting a security clearance costs sponsoring companies or agencies a lot of money – this is a case of perception not meshing with reality, however. The cost of investigations is published, with the average cost for OPM investigations at $1,230 per investigation.

The most significant and in many cases difficult to assess cost is in non-productive time while an employer waits for an employee’s clearance to be processed. It’s a key reason why already cleared personnel remain in demand – it’s because they’re easier, and cheaper, to get on the job quickly. That said, as processing time continues to decline even this cost is decreasing.

Read the full article on how much security clearances really cost here.

COMPARE:  Prices of OPM’s investigative products for Fiscal Year 2008.

57 Comments »

Federal prosecutors, the district court judge and a number of others are asking how Army Reserve 2^nd Lt. Scott Allan Bennett was able to obtain a top-secret clearance and work as a defense contractor, despite a 2008 misdemeanor conviction for lying to government officials, the Tampa Bay Online reports.

The story unfolds like something from a television crime drama….or an issue of the Onion satirical newspaper. Over the past five years Bennett has repeatedly lied to government officials, bluffed his way into meetings, offices, and in his current conviction, housing at MacDill Air Force Base.

An Army Reserve spokesman stated that Bennett’s TS/SCI clearance was obtained four months prior to his entrance into the 11^th Psychological Operations Battalion (a somewhat fitting occupation for a man of Bennett’s persuasion). Almost everyone seems to agree that regardless of how it happened, allowing such a person access to sensitive information is risky for a number of reasons.

ClearanceJobs managing director Evan Lesser, quoted in the Tampa Bay Online, says that government agencies need to investigate how Bennett got his clearance, what information he had access to and what he may have done with that information.

“It seems really difficult to believe that he did not have red flags from past behavior,” Lesser said. “Should somebody be concerned about this person? I would say most definitely. He had high level clearance and access to a fair amount of classified information at a very high level. It seems like somebody dropped the ball on this particular person.”

16 Comments »

The Washington Times is reporting that investigators have falsified hundreds of top secret security clearance investigations, claiming to have conducted research that never took place. Court records showed 170 falsified interviews and more than 1,000 that could not be verified.

Individuals quoted in the Washington Times story report that the push to adjudicate clearances as quickly as possible, as well as the increased outsourcing of investigation specialist positions, contributed to the falsification. Others cited simple greed on the part of investigators who over-promised and weren’t able to deliver completed investigations.

“The monetary loss sustained by the government does not, nor cannot, represent the cost associated with potential compromise of our nation’s security and the trust of the American people in its government’s workforce,” said Kathy L. Dillman, associate director in charge of investigations at the Office of Personnel Management.

40 Comments »

The Atlantic reports (courtesy of Registan blogger Joshua Foust) of a recent job posting for agricultural specialists, security clearance required. It points to the dramatic increase in recent years for the need for individuals in a variety of occupations to hold security clearances – from executive assistants and janitorial crews working in cleared facilities to, in this case, farmers deploying to help native populations in combat zones. As the Atlantic notes there’s good reason for individuals deploying to locations like Iraq and Afghanistan to have clearances – sensitive information is on the line and individuals working alongside deployed troops and in secure facilities will most definitely have unique access.

The need for farmers with security clearances also points to the increase number of security clearances issued in recent years. The number of clearances has become so significant, in fact, that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence is having trouble coming up with the exact number, according to reports from Secrecy News. While the director of the ODNI special security center stated in a Capitol Hill briefing that they would divulge the number of security clearances held sometime after the first of this year, the figure has yet to be disclosed.

Secrecy News reports that ODNI will still provide the number – but will include it as a part of the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2010, which required disclosure of the total number of clearances. All of this leads to the conclusion that keeping tabs on exactly how many security clearances have been issued and are active is easier said than done. A 2010 GAO report estimates the number at 2.5 million, but only ODNI knows for sure.

No Comments »

On June 3, 2011 the Defense Security Service (DSS) posted “A Quick Reference Guide for the Newly Updated Standard Form 86” (QRG). “This QRG contains detailed field descriptions, step-by-step instructions, and a link to a printable form to help you determine what information you need to gather.” Unfortunately the printable form (July 2008 version) has not yet been updated to the March 2010 version.

This QRG provides 15 pages of detailed instructions for completing the SF86—much more comprehensive than anything previously published by DSS or the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). There are several errors and discrepancies in the QRG when compared to the internal instructions in the SF86 posted at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Reginfo.gov website.  For example the QRG indicates that only 7 years of residence information is needed for NACLC/Secret; whereas the OMB version indicates that 10 years of information is needed and make no distinction between NACLC/Secret and SSBI/Top Secret. There are also “years of coverage” discrepancies for the sections on “Where You Went to School” and “Employment Activities.” The section on “Use of Alcohol” leads off with “This section requires you to provide information regarding your illegal use of drugs. . . .” The section on “Relatives” indicates that a yes or no response is possible, and if a no response is selected the program will skip over this section and proceed to the next section.

Despite the errors, DSS should be applauded for creating the QRG. Hopefully within the weeks to come, they will correct these problems and expand on what they have already provided.

A sorely needed new capability to transmit attachments by scanning and uploading or by faxing has apparently been added to the SF86 e-QIP. This will enable to applicants to submit supporting documents directly to the Defense Industrial Security Clearance Office or other Government security office.

51 Comments »

Here at ClearanceJobs we regularly get questions from individuals wondering if an indiscretion or two (i.e. – occasional drug use in college, a misdemeanor offense, or delinquent credit card debt) will hinder them in receiving a security clearance. The answer is generally  “it depends.” Factors include time elapsed since the incident, efforts to control or handle the problem and an individual’s behavior since. Because time elapsed since an error in judgement is such a critical factor, college students with youthful indiscretions may be in particular trouble. A clearance investigator is unlikely to consider your habitual marijuana use in college to be negated by the fact that you stopped after the spring semester – a few months before applying for a position with the State Department and needing to obtain a clearance.

Fortunately for many Maryland students, there’s Project SCOPE. With the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) bringing tens of thousands of jobs to Maryland – and many of those jobs in fields requiring a security clearance – the Fort Meade Alliance, a local community organization, has stepped in to educate students on what they need to know about obtaining a clearance.  The program is now offered across the state of Maryland and brings together parents, students, teachers and local business leaders to encourage young people to make smart choices – and keep their future career in mind.

It demonstrates just how important a security clearance can be, and why it’s critical for young people to realize that drug use, significant debt or criminal activity aren’t just poor choices to make now, but could impact them in their career down the road.

Editor’s note: With one-in-five high school students reporting having abused prescription drugs, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics, it’s increasingly important to remember that abusing medications, just because they’re legal, isn’t okay. Drug abuse is drug abuse.

21 Comments »