I realize the adjudication process can be lengthy, but is it common for agencies to never give an applicant an answer and just say they are “actively processing” indefinitely/every time the person checks in with their POC/Recruiter?
The unknown limbo is the worst, when you’d think after a long period of time, it would either be a yes or a no, rather than putting the applicant’s file in a pile somewhere on the side, not getting looked at.
YES. There’s not much feedback at this point in the process unless you hear from an investigator wanting some more info.
Sadly the dreaded “in process” is all we can get. In the 70’s at an amusement park in Pennsylvania, the roller coaster had a painting of the coaster on the wall with a light bulb at each hill. As it cleared each hill the light bulb lit up, building excitement for those still waiting. Simple? Yes. Effective? Absolutely. I would love to see a system of gates with a progress bar. Any remaining gate can slow you down but at least one would know they cleared certain hurdles.
True. What I’m saying is how common is it for applicants to go through the background, pass the poly, medical etc. and then never be given an answer ever. It just seems weird that agencies do this and do not just say no if they do not want the person. Why spend the money and time on the other processing?
In those cases the FSO is the belly button. I know when our folks hit 18 months and I closely follow them on this 400 to 430 person effort. On more than a few occasions people have fallen off the side of a desk for lack of a better description. A phone call to the right person, can shake it loose even if they deny having it. Like the “smacking of the TV cabinet” of the 70’s. Sometimes it just worked. Though technicians would say it was happenstance. Call it want you want, I could watch TV again.
Hey amberbunny… what is your experience with individuals on your contract that get first time DUIs and report it? Do they typically get a SOR or LOI or are they not that common as long as compliant with probation, no sign of alcoholism, and no other alcohol incidents on record? My case is with adjunicators right now and losing sleep over it.
Found guilty? How much time since the DUI arrest? What was the BAC? You might want to look at the Guideline G concerns and mitigators anyway to have a leg up if an SoR is issued.
Good on ya. Like amberbunny said before, the longer it goes and the more it is in your rear-view mirror, the better off you are.
If I may ask, how are you documenting abstinence? Or can you? Hmmm…
AA coins… 1/3/6/9/12 month sobriety coins that are dished out at meetings. About the only way I know to document… it would be corroborated with anyone that knows me too. I was kinda hoping my investigation would drag a little more to have more time as a mitigator but my investigation went quicker then average. I guess could be seen as a positive that they didn’t think issues were significant maybe? I guess we will see… have a good New year’s.
Were you in process prior to DUI?
No… DUI triggered reinvestigation which started early August with eqip.
patience is a virtue.
I know a person going through a DUI. They received a SOR and they are going through the process to try to keep their clearance.
Helpclearance2018: The fact that your CAF requested a new SF86 (e-QIP) doesn’t necessarily mean that a periodic reinvestigation (PR) has been initiated early. Your FSO/CSSO can tell you if a PR or RSI has been initiated. Often when a person reports to their FSO or CSSO that they were arrested for DUI, it only results in a warning letter from the CAF, provided it’s a first offense, there is no underlying alcohol problem, and no aggravating factors. Hopefully, you promptly reported the arrest and subsequently submitted a follow up report regarding the disposition of your case at court.
If this was your first DUI, there were no aggravating factors, no other alcohol-related incidents, and there is no evidence of an underlying alcohol problem, it is very likely your case will be favorably adjudicated. Although it’s possible the CAF could issue a warning letter; they’re usually only issued by a CAF following an Incident Report regarding a first-time DUI.
Mr William,
Perhaps you can provide your input about a specific situation. On SF86, some of the questions ask if you are willing to disconnect your relationship with your immediate family members who are not US citizens. What are the consequences of indication your refusal to such request? Thank you!
I’ve never seen a question like that on any version of the SF86 or DD398 going back to the 1960s.
I just filled out my SF86 and it was there. Perhaps it’s new.
Normally my client allows the law to work out. If they lose driving privileges in the state, they cannot drive on the compound, and the duty section cannot use a government vehicle to meet them at the gate.Once limited privileges are granted, they can drive on the compound. It isn’t unusual for falling off the wagon if they have a true a problem, but they likely repeat counseling or ASAP, and keep the interlock on the car, all costing a pretty penny. As long as the person is following the therapists guidance and law, in each of the perhaps 6 or 7 cases, they kept the clearance. In one case it did spur a re-investigation. This gentlemen had a problem. He could not abstain, and eventually refused a follow up interview, meaning I debriefed him and walked him off. I do not know if he ever gained control of his demons.
My situation is it’s not a problem, favorable alcohol assessment, only arrest and finishing probationary period.
Are you saying the only time a re-investigation was triggered was with the individual that had a problem and lost clearance? Is that a coincidence? Maybe different policies based on contractors vs civilians?