# 8,000 Continuous Vetting Alerts Were Not Reported Beforehand by Clearance Holders **URL:** \ **Category:** SECURITY CLEARANCE NEWS\ **Created:** [June 14, 2021, 5:10pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/8-000-continuous-vetting-alerts-were-not-reported-beforehand-by-clearance-holders/13241 "2021-06-14T17:10:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Marko](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/marko/32/103_2.png) [@Marko](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/Marko)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2021, 5:10pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/8-000-continuous-vetting-alerts-were-not-reported-beforehand-by-clearance-holders/13241/1 "2021-06-14T17:10:20Z")
Originally published at: [8,000 Continuous Vetting Alerts Were Not Reported Beforehand by Clearance Holders | ClearanceJobs Blog](https://www.clearancejobsblog.com/8000-continuous-vetting-alerts-were-not-reported-beforehand-by-clearance-holders/) The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency is responsible for running the DoD’s Continuous Vetting (CV) Program and during the last National Industrial Security Program Policy Advisory Committee (NISPPAC) reported getting 19,000 alerts so far in Fiscal Year 2021 on 14,000 different contractors with a security clearance. That means there were CV alerts on about six… ---
**Author:** ![RB22](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/3e96dc/32.png) [@RB22](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/RB22)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2021, 6:10pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/8-000-continuous-vetting-alerts-were-not-reported-beforehand-by-clearance-holders/13241/2 "2021-06-14T18:10:43Z")
CV/CE…Nice try that didnt last long. I’m guessing those with developed issues that were not self reported “didn’t know they were supposed to report the issues”. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![sbusquirrel](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/sbusquirrel/32/34_2.png) [@sbusquirrel](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/sbusquirrel)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2021, 6:28pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/8-000-continuous-vetting-alerts-were-not-reported-beforehand-by-clearance-holders/13241/3 "2021-06-14T18:28:40Z")
This is why we can’t have nice things 🙁 aha! and this is just for contractors, no numbers released for military or government employees ---
**Author:** ![thor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@thor](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/thor)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2021, 6:46pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/8-000-continuous-vetting-alerts-were-not-reported-beforehand-by-clearance-holders/13241/4 "2021-06-14T18:46:32Z")
Pretty simple solution….fire them all. ---
**Author:** ![ArseneWenger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e68b1a/32.png) [@ArseneWenger](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/ArseneWenger)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2021, 3:24pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/8-000-continuous-vetting-alerts-were-not-reported-beforehand-by-clearance-holders/13241/5 "2021-06-15T15:24:31Z")
But there are conceivably situations (identity theft, for example) where activity would be flagged, and the clearance holder wouldn’t know about it, unless they checked their credit reports between the ID theft and the CV alert ---
**Author:** ![ArseneWenger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e68b1a/32.png) [@ArseneWenger](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/ArseneWenger)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2021, 3:25pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/8-000-continuous-vetting-alerts-were-not-reported-beforehand-by-clearance-holders/13241/6 "2021-06-15T15:25:35Z")
I’m hit by the statistic that there were more alerts than there were contractors, meaning that the average contractor with an alert had more than one ---
**Author:** ![GoNats](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/gonats/32/509_2.png) [@GoNats](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/GoNats)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2021, 12:22am UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/8-000-continuous-vetting-alerts-were-not-reported-beforehand-by-clearance-holders/13241/7 "2021-06-16T00:22:51Z")
Continuous vetting is doable for the employment screening— for, let’s say, a bank teller or casino dealer job— but not for national security positions. The SF-86 security questionnaire is as user friendly and straightforward as furniture assembly instructions from China. If I only had a dollar for every Subject who in the course of an interview begins providing some flagging issue with, “I didn’t know where to list this information on the E-QIP…” or “I don’t know if this is important but…” Then I have to assure them that it _is_ important information to know that his/her sister-in-law is a green card holder from Beijing even though they were not required to list her under Section 18 _and_ Section 19 does apply to stateside and/or green card holders. Invariably they’re apologetic for having unintentionally omitting this important information and to which I try to assuage their embarrassment by telling them it’s ok, that’s why the clearance process involves an interview. Continuous vetting is like trusting in a self-driving Tesla. It’s fine on clear sunny days with smooth traffic patterns on open roads with no unusual patterns or obstructions in the roadway. But since the security clearance process is designed to uncover those unusual patterns and problems is it Darwin Award-level idiotic to then use continuous vetting for national security investigations. 🤦‍♂️