BY CAITLIN DOORNBOS • STARS AND STRIPES • OCTOBER 5, 2021
WASHINGTON – All Defense Department clearance holders are now under “continuous vetting” as part of a reform to the personnel security process that determines who should have access to classified information and secure facilities, the director of the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency said Tuesday.
The automated system constantly checks criminal records, credit ratings and other pertinent information for those with security clearances to “ensure the trustworthiness of the national security workforce” and “identify and address factors that may lead to insider threat incidents,” DCSA director William Lietzau told reporters at the Pentagon…
Read the rest here:
Sorry, I see that story was already posted. I wanted to remark that DOD going fully to CE is either evidence that the clearance investigation process (interviews and reports) was a sham— largely busy work— or CE is a sham. My gut tells me the latter.
Countless man hours have been spent in clarifying the discrepancies on someone’s SF-86 (e.g., How can they live in Bethesda, Maryland yet work in Arlington, Virginia?? Have they invented a teleportation machine?! How can they work a full-time job yet also be in the Nat’l Guard one weekend a month?? Have they invented a bilocation machine?! Etc., etc.).
Even a lot of the information in Sections 19 to 29 on the SF-86 will only come up or be teased out in a Subject interview (or sometimes in a source interview). CE is not designed to pick this stuff up.
So, was all this stuff unimportant then or it is unimportant now?
Does continues vetting mean that a security holder will never have to resubmit another SF86? What about polys?
My crystal ball is a little hazy and my Magic 8-ball is cracked so I will have to wing it… I suspect they will still require a new SF-86 every few years… as for the polygraph, I guess that will depend on the agency. This is all pretty new and we’ll have to see what plays out.
So what’s the deal with Reinvestigations? Is this replacing them or are we still required to submit an E-QIP every 6 years with a TS? I have heard alot of conflicting guidance so was seeing if anyone knew any recent news. Thanks
E-qips will still be needed at their respective intervals.
I agree with @t-w-investigator you will still be required to submit an updated SF-86 at least that’s what we have been told
What will be interesting is seeing how many people require an investigation… supposedly there is a provision that when circumstances dictate an investigation may still be required. Guess we’ll get a better handle on this after “CE” has been in effect for a year or two
At the time of my 5 year update I inquired as to why no contact and was told I’m on CE. I wasn’t asked to fill out an 86. Maybe an error somewhere. Anyway I just love CE because I no longer have to worry about what my neighbors, coworkers or supervisor might say!! No longer have to worry about getting written up for something stupid that would cause a 1 hour interview grilling!!! And as far as self reporting…I don’t understand any of that.
One of the reasons I ask is because I am about to start a new contact and the client required me to re-submit something called an SF-86 Extended version and go back 10 years again recently. I thought it was weird considering I am not due for a “reinvestigation” or review until latest 2025. I was told it was just a review if any changes occurred since my last BI in 2019. I did and was submitted for a crossover and after two weeks I was approved and heard nothing at all from the client except I am good to start. So would that be included in my next “review”? I was told by my FSO that you will be required to resubmit a E-QIP and unless there are any major changes that I will just continue in CE. I don’t see the point on why I was required to submit another SF-86 though prior to starting.
First I’ve heard of that. The situation sounds more like it would call for an SF-86C which covers any changes since the last SF-86. But as long as it all worked out.
Self-reporting has always been in place. Now we have tools to monitor areas where you are supposed self-report and a process when you don’t.
I have been doing a lot of “Why did you not report…” (bankruptcy, DUI, Domestic Battery, foreign spouse, weapon violation, etc) cases since CE. The CE process puts even more responsibility on the individual and employer to be responsible. Good or bad, this is where we have been heading for years.
CE/CV focuses on the bigger issues, higher risk issues.
If you’re a clearance holder, you have no excuse for not understating self-reporting requirements.
You might as well get used to hearing this.
If all defense contractors are now on CE. I can’t figure out why I still currently receive plenty of T5-R update work on defense contractors with little or no issues since their last investigation. Much of it is active duty, but not all. There are still so many things that CE will never catch.
One thing I don’t understand is why not let individuals update their SF86 when something changes (travel, adverse information, foreign contacts…).
Self-reporting can sometimes be a pain when you have to report the same information to several security offices, based on who you’re briefed with…
I have a weird question so maybe someone knows. I’ve wondered when you self reported were does that information go? Who’s does that get reported too? Does it go into a file somewhere to bring up during like a reinvestigation? Probably a dumb question but just curious.
How is the government going to ever get employees if it keeps up this type of behavior making everyone the enemy
That’s what the SF-86C is for.
I wonder if this is going to lead to some kind of SF-86C (has anything changed since your last BI?) submitted annually or something like that; as I recall the 86C is only a one page form and if nothing has changed you more or less just sign the bottom.
Just speculating, have not heard about anything like this… but remember you heard it here first
Or leave it open (to an extent), for clearance holders to update anytime anything changes…
But that would mean a lot more work for investigator/FSOs/adjudicators