Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Security Clearance

A security clearance is a status granted to individuals allowing them access to classified information. Those trying to get a clearance may have questions such as how does one go about attaining a clearance? And, what are the different levels? As well as other questions. This area will allow those that have clearances offer advice and suggestions to those inquiring about clearances or upgrading their clearances.

To read today's top news stories on federal employee pay, benefits, retirement, job rights and other workplace issues visit FederalDaily.com.

2 Pages12>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
FLARAIDER  
#1 Posted : Monday, March 19, 2012 10:48:24 PM(UTC)
FLARAIDER

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/6/2012(UTC)
Posts: 65


I have a TS BI underway for a gov job i accepted a TO from.

I recently landed a job with a defense contractor in a secret position and will likely not accept the final offer once my TS comes through for the fed job.

What happens to the TS in this case? Can my non-fed employer sponsor the clearance and bump me to a TS if needed?

I seems a waste for me not use the clearance after all the work that occured to get it.

hustonj  
#2 Posted : Tuesday, March 20, 2012 1:00:58 AM(UTC)
hustonj

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 5/17/2011(UTC)
Posts: 1,169

Was thanked: 7 time(s) in 6 post(s)
The TS belongs to the sponsoring agency, not the individual.
 
As soon as the sponsoring agency finds out that they don't need a clearance for you, it should get dropped.  Taking a private job with the intent of refusing the Federal job AFTER the clearance is approved, but not notifying the Federal sponsoring agency, could be considered fraud, since you are explicitly making a choice which causes the agency to waste taxpayer money and time.
 
If you aren't going to take the Federal job, tell the HR team that you have been in contact with so that they have a chance to get the position filled by somebody else.
 
If you aren't working for the sponsoring agency, then your choice nto to tell them that you aren't going to work for them becomes the CAUSE fo the wasted money and effort.  Don't claim you feel badly about the waste you are causing, and then ask how to benefit from it anyway.
FLARAIDER  
#3 Posted : Tuesday, March 20, 2012 1:39:32 AM(UTC)
FLARAIDER

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/6/2012(UTC)
Posts: 65


hustonj wrote:
The TS belongs to the sponsoring agency, not the individual.
 
As soon as the sponsoring agency finds out that they don't need a clearance for you, it should get dropped.  Taking a private job with the intent of refusing the Federal job AFTER the clearance is approved, but not notifying the Federal sponsoring agency, could be considered fraud, since you are explicitly making a choice which causes the agency to waste taxpayer money and time.
 
If you aren't going to take the Federal job, tell the HR team that you have been in contact with so that they have a chance to get the position filled by somebody else.
 
If you aren't working for the sponsoring agency, then your choice nto to tell them that you aren't going to work for them becomes the CAUSE fo the wasted money and effort.  Don't claim you feel badly about the waste you are causing, and then ask how to benefit from it anyway.

"...Taking a private job with the intent of refusing the Federal job AFTER the clearance is approved, but not notifying the Federal sponsoring agency, could be considered fraud, since you are explicitly making a choice which causes the agency to waste taxpayer money and time."

WRONG...you can answer my question, or not, but save the ethics lesson.  

No agency, fed or otherwise could honestly expect someone to sit around unemployed while a security clearance is conducted. Especially considering the duration these things take.

I already had this conversation with the agencies security manager and they stated they do not expect people to "wait around", and are not at all suprised when they find and keep better employment during their BI process and ultimatley decline the Final Offer once its extended.

hustonj  
#4 Posted : Tuesday, March 20, 2012 3:35:19 AM(UTC)
hustonj

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 5/17/2011(UTC)
Posts: 1,169

Was thanked: 7 time(s) in 6 post(s)
FLARAIDER:  When you publicly post a question, you open the revealed activity up to public scrutiny.  You don't want to be judged for wasting taxpayer money in an effort to seek personal advantage?  Don't advertise that you are doing so.
 
You have no control over what other people choose (or not) to consider fraud.  That's also a reality you seem not to understand.
 
Your post revealed that you are trying to get a government agency to save your new employer money by having that agency cover the full cost of evaluating you for a higher level of security clearance, even though you reveal that you clearly intend not to work for the agency (so they have no reason to pay for the investigation/adjudication in the first place) is a pretty good sign that you NEED ethics lessons, whether you want them or not.
 
 
Edit:  tYpin'
hustonj2012-03-20 11:45:05
af_50  
#5 Posted : Friday, March 23, 2012 3:17:05 AM(UTC)
af_50

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/30/2008(UTC)
Posts: 57

It depends on what stage the investigation is in as to whether it's "wasting money" or not.  If the investigation is over 30 days old at OPM, then the Government agency is going to be charged for it regardless of whether they cancel it now or not.  Also, if the investigation is already complete at OPM and it's just in the adjudication phase at the Gov agency, the contractor will be able to request the completed investigation from OPM and if it is favorable, then they will be able to adjudicate a clearance based on that investigation without anyone having to spend anymore money.  Even if the contractor did request a clearance on you, OPM would send a requirements already met notice to them, not charge them and send a copy of the investigation. 
Also, you never know what will happen with the contractor position.  If for some reason it doesn't pan out or you don't like it, you may want the federal position when your clearance is complete. 
Jordpa  
#6 Posted : Friday, March 23, 2012 5:14:21 AM(UTC)
Jordpa

Rank: Advisor

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/21/2011(UTC)
Posts: 184

What does it mean when your only contact about your security clearance does not reply to your emails or phone call?  I am 8 months waiting and don't know what my status is on my clearance. Security did tell me they would be doing a new clearance after I did the interview, poly, etc.  I don't know if I am in adjudication or what.  Are they trying to tell me something.  I have a prior clearance which is still active. I have checked the job board and it still says I have been selected. About 3 months ago I did get an answer to one email I sent saying it is still pending, whatever that means.  To my knowledge none of my references, jobs, etc. have been contacted.  I just think it is kind of strange.  When I was cleared before lots of people called to tell me they had been contacted.   This is for DIA. 

af_50  
#7 Posted : Friday, March 23, 2012 6:38:15 AM(UTC)
af_50

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/30/2008(UTC)
Posts: 57

Sometimes it just takes a while and the only status I am allowed to give people is that it's either pending or complete, no details.  Investigations vary greatly on the time frames and a lot of times there is no rhyme or reason for it.  I've seen a TS where someone had issues with credit take less than 3 months to get completed and adjudicated and seen low risk public trust investigations with no issues at all take 8 or 9 months.

Jordpa  
#8 Posted : Friday, March 23, 2012 6:49:42 AM(UTC)
Jordpa

Rank: Advisor

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/21/2011(UTC)
Posts: 184

Thanks at last some info!!  So if i don't get an answer from an email, the contact must be saying he doesn't have anything new to tell me.  I guess they get tired of people constantly asking the same questions.  But I only have questioned 3 times in 8 months.  Patience is best I guess.     

FLARAIDER  
#9 Posted : Friday, March 23, 2012 9:44:28 AM(UTC)
FLARAIDER

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/6/2012(UTC)
Posts: 65


af_50 wrote:
It depends on what stage the investigation is in as to whether it's "wasting money" or not.  If the investigation is over 30 days old at OPM, then the Government agency is going to be charged for it regardless of whether they cancel it now or not.  Also, if the investigation is already complete at OPM and it's just in the adjudication phase at the Gov agency, the contractor will be able to request the completed investigation from OPM and if it is favorable, then they will be able to adjudicate a clearance based on that investigation without anyone having to spend anymore money.  Even if the contractor did request a clearance on you, OPM would send a requirements already met notice to them, not charge them and send a copy of the investigation. 
Also, you never know what will happen with the contractor position.  If for some reason it doesn't pan out or you don't like it, you may want the federal position when your clearance is complete. 
 
Thank you very much for anwering my question w/o super-imposing some imaginary moral high ground into your answer like Capt. ButtHurt McTypo above.
 
Yes its way more than 30 days old, in adjudication, and  I fully disclosed to the HM and Sec Mngr if it wasn't GTG by the time my terminal leave finished I would seek any employment available. They were totally cool with it. 
 
Exactly as you stated, I have not decided on turning down the final offer when it comes through as the contractor world is very fickle about job security. We'll have to see when/if the time comes. I just wanted to know the options.
 
Thanks again for your answer!
SkyIA  
#10 Posted : Friday, March 23, 2012 9:51:59 PM(UTC)
SkyIA

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/1/2011(UTC)
Posts: 392

I was going to defend huston's assertion that there is indeed an ethical question here on your part, but since you've dismissed that as unimportant for yourself I guess it would be a waste of time.

But even for someone so blind, maybe you should know that ethics is part of these institutions as well. There is a record when it comes to the data of the investigation process. You will need to disclose past investigations. Down the road, this could hurt you for suitability reasons. So from a practical standpoint this does matter.

af_50  
#11 Posted : Friday, March 23, 2012 10:44:08 PM(UTC)
af_50

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/30/2008(UTC)
Posts: 57

How is it going to hurt him for suitability reasons?  He's not going to have his clearance revoked if he doesn't take the job, they are just going to cancel it since he's not going to be working for that agency.  I review hundreds of SF-85p's and SF-86's every month because I handle employee security clearances and background investigations for my agency.  There is nothing that I see that will hurt him if it shows that he had a clearance completed and favorably adjudicated and then cancelled,  it happens all of the time and there is nothing unethical about it.  Again, if OPM receives an investigation from an agency and they start working it, once it hits 30 days, it's billed for the entire cost.  So, he is actually saving the government money because if they complete and adjudicate his TS (which has already been paid for), his contractor can use that investigation as reciprocity.  This means, the contractor won't have to pay for an investigation.  The contractor is paid by the government so any money that the contractor has to spend on the investigation, is technically paid for by the government. 

monster  
#12 Posted : Sunday, March 25, 2012 12:43:36 AM(UTC)
monster

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/30/2009(UTC)
Posts: 225

I know of an incident (and I'm talking real something the REALLY happened...not the "opinion" that seems to permeated in this place) of a person that was doing something similar. He ended up without anything. Clearances take into account "character". And I believe the OP lacks character. Let's put it this way, I would not want to hire him, whether I was a Fed or a Contractor.
 
Now, I am going to state MY opinion: I consider what he is doing FRAUD (as is using tax payers money to enrich a privately owned company) and UNETHICAL. And let get something straight, all it takes is for an Agency express concern about a particular contractor practice to scared the heck out of that contractor. Furthermore, not every contractor has the ability to hold a clearance (it has to be sponsor by a Federal Agency).
SkyIA  
#13 Posted : Sunday, March 25, 2012 1:51:39 AM(UTC)
SkyIA

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/1/2011(UTC)
Posts: 392


monster wrote:
Clearances take into account "character". And I believe the OP lacks character. Let's put it this way, I would not want to hire him, whether I was a Fed or a Contractor.
 


Thanks, this was what I was trying to get at.
chili.relleno  
#14 Posted : Sunday, March 25, 2012 3:08:34 AM(UTC)
chili.relleno

Rank: Advisor

Groups: Registered
Joined: 2/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 180



I've been through the job search process several times.  I've been flown all over the country on interview trips.  The companies that flew me to the opposite coast for thousands of dollars (airfare, hotel, meals, rental car, the time of interviewers.  yes, it's thousands) knew full well I was looking at other places.  They accepted the probability of my taking another job as the cost of doing business.

I don't see how this is any different.  If you're looking for a job and a company likes you but you need a clearance and they start the process it's at their risk.  They know you're looking for a job and will be looking at other jobs.

Look up how much the average clearance costs.  It's nothing compared with what the gubment wastes on BS every single day and it's the cost of doing business.





chili.relleno2012-03-25 11:15:56
monster  
#15 Posted : Monday, April 02, 2012 9:51:20 AM(UTC)
monster

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/30/2009(UTC)
Posts: 225

chili.relleno wrote:
I've been through the job search process several times.  I've been flown all over the country on interview trips.  The companies that flew me to the opposite coast for thousands of dollars (airfare, hotel, meals, rental car, the time of interviewers.  yes, it's thousands) knew full well I was looking at other places.  They accepted the probability of my taking another job as the cost of doing business.

I don't see how this is any different.  If you're looking for a job and a company likes you but you need a clearance and they start the process it's at their risk.  They know you're looking for a job and will be looking at other jobs.

Look up how much the average clearance costs.  It's nothing compared with what the gubment wastes on BS every single day and it's the cost of doing business.
Clearances are started AFTER offers are ACCEPTED.
 
HUGE difference there. But then again, we have people that either don't have Federal jobs or don't hire people. Furthermore, the cost of doing business? These are tax payers money, dude.
bsshoomez  
#16 Posted : Monday, April 02, 2012 9:12:54 PM(UTC)
bsshoomez

Rank: Rookie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 11/20/2009(UTC)
Posts: 30

So let me get this straight -

1. Govey offer accepted
2. Clearance process started
3. Wait
4. Wait
5. Interviewed at other places during #3,#4
6. Offer came from #5
7. Clearance completed
8. Decline offer from #1 because of timely issues

I think its OK but as long as you let the agency know that you will continue to look as its a (at-will) position.  

They tell you it will take 4 months to 10 years so they can't expect you to put life on hold until your unemployed!

F/A Lisa  
#17 Posted : Thursday, April 05, 2012 3:01:42 AM(UTC)
F/A Lisa

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/2/2011(UTC)
Posts: 209

.F/A Lisa2012-04-05 11:17:38
F/A Lisa  
#18 Posted : Thursday, April 05, 2012 3:11:21 AM(UTC)
F/A Lisa

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/2/2011(UTC)
Posts: 209

It is full charge if the case is discontinued after 30 days, however the agency gets credit if they resubmit within four months, so the what OP is doing is a waste of tax payers money.
chili.relleno  
#19 Posted : Thursday, April 05, 2012 8:57:50 AM(UTC)
chili.relleno

Rank: Advisor

Groups: Registered
Joined: 2/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 180

OP isn't wasting tax payers' money.  He told the hiring manager he was
going to still keep looking and the manager decided to take the chance. 
The hiring manager wasted tax payers' money if anyone did.



SkyIA  
#20 Posted : Thursday, April 05, 2012 10:42:29 AM(UTC)
SkyIA

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/1/2011(UTC)
Posts: 392


chili.relleno wrote:


Look up how much the average clearance costs.  It's nothing compared with what the gubment wastes on BS every single day and it's the cost of doing business.






There is a lot of BS out there about the full cost of a BI or an SSBI. What's your sources?

It is NOT as simple as typing something into google.
SkyIA2012-04-05 18:47:50
Rss Feed  Atom Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.


This page was generated in 1.616 seconds.