Well look at it this way if they thought the answer would be no, they probably would not bother.
It could be something as simple as they are going to have you interview with some people in training and it is cheaper to fly you in than 3 of them out, plus they would lose all that work time.
Either way it is a good thing that they are taking the time tom get to a yes vs just saying NO!
I would be happy about it and just relax as much as possible. Relaxing has helped me thru 7 polygraphs with never an issue, call back etc.
True I have been reading that, its not uncommon and its generally to get a better clarification and adjudicate. But since they don’t tell you much, the whole thing can be stressful like what am i walking into etc. I’ll go with the flow and see what they need. A free trip back to DC why not eh
Did you offer to interview remote (facetime, google meet, etc)? They might agree if you tell them you would have to fly out just to answer a few questions.
I didn’t even ask. He just said that I needed to come in for a security interview. The way it was said, i don’t think there was room for negotiation lol.
I think if there was a “remote” option, he would have said it.
So far the possibilities range from onboarding security interview to clarification items on BI.
My advice for future situations would be to ask the person who makes the request. If someone calls you, ask them what it is for and have them explain it. Personally, if I am going to get on a plane and go somewhere, I am going to know why first. If there is something they are unable to tell you they will let you know. When I interview a subject the very last question I ask is do you have any questions for me.
I was told I needed to come in person and i asked for what and he said “as i said, we need you to come in for your security interview” . i asked what is it about, he said “I cannot tell you that”
What I mean, for example, when I contact a subject and need to meet in person because of developed information that has to be confronted in person, I cannot disclose the information over the phone, but I can say that they are still in the investigation stage and I need clarification on information discussed in the previous interview. I can tell them the purpose without disclosing anything that has to be done in person. He can get clarification on what stage the security interview is for (investigation, adjudication, onboarding) without having any information disclosed that has to be done in person.
WE spoke 2 times. The first time i asked if it was investigation or adjudication. He said I cannot tell you. Second time he called to then confirm the date, I asked what was it about and he said I cannot disclose that.
Just to be clear, I’m pretty sure I’m in adjudication. Reason is because DCSA did my investigation and i was in touch with 3 of these investigators and they handed their report to the agency in December I’m pretty sure because the primary investigator told me that she was writing the report and sending to the agency the first week of December.
So since the guy scheduling my face to face security interview at the agency did not want to tell me anything, i found it strange
Well I guess I will see which it is, an indoctrination or clarification on the BI since they told me to come in person for a security interview and no further details were given.
No not yet. Its next week. I’m going into it as a clarification meeting. I have said all i had to on the SF86 and to the investigator, so most likely they just need additional info.
I followed this thread about a week ago, and was thinking ……well I’ll keep that to myself. However while pursuing background material for a private investigation I just came across a 1974 report, you know, one of these:
“NSTRUCTION SHEET Destroy pages iii and 23-26 dated 24 June 1974 and insert the attached pages. Paragraph 29 is added to include reference to the program for the ….”
There’s a “Security Indoctrination” section, but it’s redacted. This is from some sort of personnel manual from that place over next door to the Turner Fairbank Highway Research Center (but is federal and shares some resources with the Virginia highway people), anyway, there’s a historic record of “security indoctrination” in a new hire manual which discusses many of the SF86 topics discussed here.
The person who i met with, she told me specifically she was adjudication and will be writing the final report to recommend or not. I asked point blank what her role was and she told me
Forgot to post an update. It went well. She needed more details on the SF86 and the poly. About 1.5 hours long. I had to explain why it would be that the machine reacted. Was asked about drugs, counterintelligence and my siblings. she said she was adjudication and she is the one who will write the final report recommending or not recommending. It has been been 3 weeks since the personal interview and haven’t heard a peep…radio silence. So not much of an update i guess
-/