Weird question/situation: I was previously diagnosed as alcohol dependent BUT my treatment recommendations only involved moderated consumption. With the new Adjudicative Guidelines that now use alcohol use disorder as opposed to abuse/dependence, what’s the deal with this situation? I’m completely confused.
I think if you are complying with treatment recommendations, and you don’t have any incidents, then it should be OK. But I am by no means an expert.
You have a treatment plan that involves “moderate consumption” . . . That doesn’t sound like “normal and customary” treatment and MAY not be considered enough by an adjudicator.
True, I did find that a little strange but it says what it says. From the Guideline G section:
“(d) the individual has successfully completed a treatment program along with any required aftercare, and has demonstrated a clear and established pattern of modified consumption or abstinence in accordance with treatment recommendations.”
This guidance does not distinguish between abuse and dependence. Now it is an “alcohol use disorder.”
For an IC position, my timeline is approximately 1000 days since I submitted my application and 570 days since my BI commenced.
Also for an IC position, I’m over 700 days since I sent back the SF86 and accepted offer.
Is this as a fed or contractor? And are you on a interim?
The clubhouse is getting full
A little over 700 days since I sent back initial SF-86; amended version around 600 days.
So guess I’m not quite into 700 day territory, but boy this is annoying.
I’m close to 730 days since my SF-86 was submitted. Investigation is still open I think.
I’m confident I will eventually get a start date. I guess a grouchy adjudicator could say, “Hey, this guy has some minor issues, nothing too big, but screw him anyway” and deny me. More likely, I feel like they’ll find someone more qualified to fill the position. The real fear I think is that the process just drags out for another year or two, because somehow I’m a marginal candidate that is easily replaceable so they don’t feel a need to get around to me.
I’d say around 85%.
Everyone is replaceable, though. And if they are just going to keep everyone waiting until their “dream candidate” comes through, they’re going to be waiting a long time to find that person. And then what happens when that person leaves to the private sector? I’ve thought the same thing. I didn’t feel like I was the most qualified person when they gave me the offer, but who really does?
I feel so bad for so many of us here. Very disheartening, cruel even.
Yeah, luckily unemployment, particularly among the types of people who would be qualified to work in the IC, is low enough that ordinary rubes like ourselves stand a good shot.
It just drives me insane not knowing. I wonder how much the delay in adjudication is driven by lack of open positions vs. a huge backlog vs. something else. It’s a very arcane, frustrating process which only gets worse the nearer you get to finally receiving an answer after all of these years.
I can only speak for myself, but lack of jobs available in the specific area and agency I’m working with is not the issue. My theory is that the long wait is more of a power move. The “harder” it is to get in, the less likely you’ll want to leave when you finally do. They could treat you like ■■■■ and you’d put up with it because you waited so so long to get the job. Just an idea.
If you really think that way, why do you want to get into the industry?
Seriously . . . You’re over thinking the process. What does the government do efficiently? There is no strategic goal behind the backlog. Too few investigators and adjudicators, spread too thin. It costs money to ramp up the system but it’s not a showy project that congress can get behind and throw money at.
2 Likes
It doesn’t take over two years . . . It takes SOME PEOPLE over two years and I certainly didn’t say, or imply, incompetence.
Having a backup of over 750,000 cases to investigate is no joke lol.
It’s also nothing to make up stories about . . .
While some of the people here are waiting a while for the investigation to begin, I’d wager most people here are stuck in adjudication.
Why it takes a year or more to adjudicate is the question, especially for those candidates without dozens of foreign contacts, extensive travel, or financial issues. There’s either a tremendous backlog or there is some reason why files are left to languish as long as they often do.