I have held TS for 5+ years and SCI for 4. I accepted a position requiring a CI Poly at a 3 letter agency. After 3 attempts I completed the first half of the test. A week later I was pulled from the contract and told this has nothing to do with performance and I would still have my clearances. A week later my clearances changed to a LOJ. I got a job a few weeks later with a company which submitted an RRU for me. I was just notified JPAS would like me to resubmit an eqip as followup to the RRU. My clearance was not supposed to expire until 2019/2020. I have not idea what to make of all this. It has been a nightmare.
I have no idea if this is what happened in your situation but in some cases, any adverse action can result in having to resubmit. Not passing the poly (and I dont know what half a CI poly is ) could count as an adverse action, even Loss of Jurisdiction possibly.
I have extensive poly experience as I suffered through 4 myself. After three Poly’s normally you are contacted for an interview and even a follow up interview to determine the source of the reason you have difficulty with the Poly. That is fairly routine and several employees have had to submit to this onerous and scary process. Two employees required 3 Poly’s and multiple interviews to clear up the issue whatever it was. Clearance gave me as SM the option of retaining a few of the employees at a lower clearance level. We can utilize them in many capacities so we opted to do that. Point being: you should have been well informed of where you were in the process and what steps were taken, along with what the issue in question is. It would seem the new sponsor clearance folks wants a quick review of your record to see if there is a reason meeting their guidelines to reject you. Different agencies have different standards and what causes a rejection from one may not disqualify you at another. If they review the SF86, find no issues you can clear and continue to prosper. Be truthful and accurate on the subject I am confident you know exists. Don’t fall into a lack of candor trap.
Sorry for the delayed response, but a little has changed in my case.
I resubmitted my SF86 and added comments for the things that possibly could apply to what was discussed in my CI poly. My FSO(s) both said they didn’t think the information was needed, but I wanted to be as upfront as possible. About 4 months ago today, my clearance was suspended. Pending review of the information that was submitted to the DODCAF.
From everything I have read as suspension usually is followed by a letter of some sort, which I have not received. I also have read that a suspension is supposed to be handled as quickly as possible, but 4 months seems like long time in this circumstance.
Do you think the length is a good sign. I have perfect credit, no drug use, no police record, no incident reports, no risky foreign contacts. Honestly, everything that came up in my CI Poly was minor and I feel was misunderstood due to the administrators severe lack of technical understanding.
Any advise or words of encouragement are greatly appreciated.
I won’t ask you to share this discussion here, but without more info it makes it difficult to give insight. If the issue is in reference to you being less than 100% truthful, and you later revealed something…that can be seen as a lack of candor. Those are tough to defend. If they believe you should have been more upfront…you cannot change the past. If they decide they are going for a revocation, you get a statement of reasons. If an appeal is available they speak to that. Since you know what the situation was you can google the adjudicative guidelines and research potential mitigation. Put those things in motion now and then be able to speak to them. If your livelihood depends on this clearance I recommend a clearance lawyer. Getting one now can get you on the strongest path to defend or explain away the situation.
I have considered getting an attorney, but most people I have talked to say it is difficult to do anything without a SOR. It has been over 7 months now since my clearance was suspended, pending adjudication. It has been 15 months since I was removed from the program/agency. My FSO told me that DSS is all set, just waiting on what ever the IC agency has to submit. They have put in 5 or 6 requests for the information and received no response. They said they will continue to request the information once a month until they receive it. At this point part of me wants to quit and get a job in the private sector, but I know if I don’t see this through then I will have to deal with it again down the line, years from now. I have been told time fixes everything, but I need a final determination no matter what.
Since this all happened I have earned my CISSP and am finishing up my B.S. in Cyber Security and Information Assurance. I am hoping this will help my clearance case down the line. I have seen the whole person concept brought up a lot, do you have any information or a better explanation on that.
Thank you for your time.
It seems you could benefit from a cleared clearance lawyer to get the SOR. Where you go from there or what you actually face, depends on what is there. Sounds like this was an Interim?
You said three poly’s and you completed half of a CI. Two poly’s I expect. A third happened on enough occasions to know it happens. Your situation sounds different. Did they ask if you were using countermeasures? Were you? Did you by chance read up on Poly’s and this script ran in the back of your mind whether you wanted it or not? You say “no risky foreign contacts.” Is it safe to assume you have and correctly reported each on the SF86? It doesn’t matter if you think they aren’t risky, it matters if they are risky, and you likely would not know that they are. I have foreign contacts. That isn’t unusual.
What specific issues came up during three attempted Poly’s? Was it medical? Is there a medical issue? Did you sit for the entire Poly or remove sensors and get angry? (it happens). I think you should focus on this aspect of events to understand what happened and work from there.
Whole person is used to best understand character. It doesn’t mitigate all things. There are plenty highly educated people with sketchy items in their past. If you were honest about all things, hid nothing, and all past SF86 info is accurate, all claimed education correct, all references well known and support you in a positive manner…no neighbor issues where folks may have said bad things…there remains an issue. They do not have the ability to simply say "we didn’t like his mustache. You are in the best position to know what this about. If you sincerely wracked your thoughts and find no issue counter to the highest adjudicative standards…I recommend a lawyer. You deserve answers. Or at least a starting point. But with no SOR…you don’t yet have that. I’m not calling you out, but my experience walking at least 15 people off the installation with a revocation…each claimed to have no clue. Those wanting to appeal brought me the SOR and then told me they knew the reasons.
You have considered getting an attorney . . . Have you talked to one? Most will provide a free consult and will tell you, then and there, what your chances are and what they can do to help.
Invariably, it appears that there is always more to these supposedly “innocuous” issues from the past than the applicant has disclosed in this blog!
amberbunny, It was not for an interim clearance. I held a TS/SCI for years prior to taking the job at the 3 letter agency. I absolutely did not use countermeasures nor did I ever read anything about polygraphs prior or during the time that I sat for the polygraph. I reported all foreign contacts on my SF-86 at the time of re-investigation. I then included new possible contacts on my application months before taking the job.
In regards to the anger subject. I was extremely passive throughout until the questions shifted into full-scope/life style questions that were uncomfortable to say the least. At this point I sharply questioned what any of these questions have to do with the the questions in the scope of the CI-Poly. He said he was just trying to get a better understanding of me. At that point he stopped asking me the questions and re-focused on the original questions as if nothing happened.
As far as being honest, I was honest to a fault. Discussing things that were not even necessary, but felt I would let them decide if they were applicable or not. In hind sight that was a bad idea, things kept being misinterpreted or twisted. If I remembered an additional detail I brought it up, I was then told I was piecemealing information which was not my intention.
The main issues that arose were regarding use of information technology. I worked at a very relaxed place that allowed us to use excess equipment for training, fully approved by our management and government lead. The polygrapher(s) could not understand how an agency would allow this and I tried to explain that IC security practices are far more strict than those of places outside the IC. Not getting into to to much detail a lot of it came down to technical interpretation that they were not capable of comprehending. At some points it felt as though I was being lead into answers instead of answering questions. If I said, “I do not think so” I was told, “so it is a possibility.” I even asked to leave at one point and said I was done, but was told “lets just take a break.” At that point I was willing to say anything to make it end.
All I am looking for is due process. A few weeks after my 3rd polygraph I was told that they would not proceed further with the polygraph and I was removed from the program. I was told that my clearances would not be affected. I was even told I was free to apply to another position on a different program. Now here I am a year and a half later. I am prepared to consult an attorney and mitigate/clarify any concerns, but I can do nothing without a SOR or a final determination. According to 2 FSO’s, it does not even show that I have taken a polygraph anymore. If the information was concerning then why is it taking so long to supply it to the adjudicators.
Sorry for the long winded response and thank you for your time.
If you allowed them to lead you down paths you did not intend I can guarantee they captured the data as they wanted to frame it. I make clear to my people if you smoked once stick to that. Don’t assume you can clarify later. Never agree to any other framing than how you want to frame it. If you do not show as submitted for an upgrade…then you are simply not in process. You will get a SOR if they deem you a failure. Period. They will also normally report your clearance denial to all others you hold a clearance with. Not all other agencies will revoke. I would say management and client approved. And keep repeating that. If they want to investigate, let them. I need not provide the rope to hang myself.
I realize fully now that I cannot clarify anything, which is my fault for not realizing the circumstances. I had chosen not to research or read anything about polygraphs because I never felt I anything to hide. Thank you for your insight.
Update: Almost a year later I was again asked to resubmit my SF86. I did so promptly in November as I did last December. I have heard nothing back as of yet. It has now been 22 months. My company has been great and I am thankful to still be working. My TS will be set to expire some time in 2019, my FSO believes at this point it might be best to let is expire and then resubmit for a Secret and go from there. I assume time can only help me at this point.
I have had several tell me during debrief they felt they would have the chance to talk to something later on. This is why I am adamant about sticking to yes and no and answers and never agreeing to any little “tie up loose ends and make a general statement” from poly. Doing so feels confrontational and not in your best interests. But I had to argue rather strenuously they misaligned a few items and that was not what I was agreeing to. Technically the standards for Secret and TS are the same. However I have had a few they allowed to keep Secret and not get TS. That is rare. Time is your friend. If it is an unresolved issued…it can remain just that if they are comfortable with you having access to Secret.I have had one get an “inconclusive” on a CI poly, so they were denied the SCI. $ years later they completed a full scope and did achieve that sci.
Thank you for the response. I was never told I failed my poly, just that they were not continuing. I was even told I was free to reapply to another program.
Currently, my company was notified that it has been two years since I had access and to remove me from the system/access and debriefed. I am now being resubmitted for a TS. As you stated time is my friend, it has been over two years. Hopefully this all gets corrected, I have been told interim’s are only taking 1-3 weeks now.
The company may have lost patience or believed you would not clear so they cut ties. Plus side: not a formal denial. So yes you can apply elsewhere. Downside: you need face whatever it is (in your estimation) that caused them to not want to continue. Are you high risk to clear? IS there significant debt? Recreational drug use etc?
I am still with my same company, they have been working with me to get this corrected. I am not a high risk, that I know of. 800 credit score, no criminal history at all, no drug use or alcohol use. The only reason my company was notified to debrief was because it has been 2 years since I utilized my clearance according to JPAS. So now I am resubmitting all over again.
I used to work at a place that at one time had lots and lots of SCI work for multiple customers. Then the watering hole started drying up. People started getting debriefed from SCI accesses but their clearances remained active… that is, if anything came up, they could be briefed as soon as the customer gave the approval.
Then I think they started getting even tighter on everything and I think they even started admin debriefing people from TS… but again, they could get the TS back quickly if need be.
Now, when it comes time for a periodic reinvestigation, I dont know how they handled it. Everything seems to be much more tightly controlled than before.
The real bear is when the government client won’t conduct re-investigations on schedule due to backlog. They feel you are in access, what’s the problem? But if you depart and you are well beyond 10 on a Secret or 5 on a TS…once they close out the clearance, you are done and must come back as an initial usually.
King/Squirrel I think it indicates some new boss looking closely at the clearance list and “cleaning” it up. Every once in a while I get a new government boss and they will tell me to close out the clearances of numerous people not realizing the dynamic nature of what we do. When work surges and there are no sponsored and cleared people to put in the seats…and they realize their evaluation is dependent on contract performance success, they begin to understand.