I had to have a follow-up interview over the phone due to some info that was obtained during my investigation. However, I also had to have the entire subject interview done all over again. The BI said the original BI left the company and that’s why we had to redo the entire interview. But I have also heard that if the obtained info is serious they must do the entire subject interview all over again, but mine was over the phone and not in person. Does any of this sound right? I don’t get why I’d have to redo the whole interview just because the original BI left the contractor.
did you have anything serious that needed to be covered? without any information from you, we would not be able to advise you.
It involved info from a couple of write ups I received at a previous job. I disclosed I was written up multiple times, but I didn’t include an incident that was in the write up because I don’t remember it even happening. I told the original BI who interviewed me that I didn’t remember all the details of the write ups. The BI didnt think it would affect me. Originally, the BI called and said they needed to speak with me regarding obtained info, but when the BI called she asked those question and redid the whole subject interview because the original BI left the company. As I said before, I don’t know if the 2nd subject interview was due to the obtained info or because the original BI left. It also seemed like the original BI didn’t get enough info cause they needed more personal references. And the 2nd interview was over the phone.
How long after you filled out the sf form did it take for the first interview and then the second interview?
Thanks,
TC 
Filled out the form last July last year and I had the first interview around Oct last year and the 2nd one couple of months ago. From what I gathered, my investigation is almost closed.
I had a similar thing happen in that I had a second interview after being terminated by my previous employer. The second interview took place 4 months after the first, and included only things that changed since then, namely being written up and fired. Two months after the second interview, my JPAS status shows “CLOSED”. Onto adjudication!
What level of clearance is this?
There are numerous reasons why you might have a follow up interview with an investigator.
It was poor form for the second investigator to tell you the original investigator had moved on, otherwise, your interview appeared to be a normal follow up interview.
Only time I ever heard of the original subject interview being completely re-done was in relation to the USIS/OPM hack a few years back when a number of cases were started over from scratch.
I’ve heard of extensive follow-up being required when the initial investigator did not do a very good job or left a lot of loose ends and somebody had to finish the job.
The follow up interview often appears to be an initial interview. The questioning is actually a quick review of most question areas (to see if anything significant has changed since the last interview) then the specific questions that need to be asked, followed up with normal closing questions.
Subjects not familiar with the ins and outs of the field process often think the follow up interviews are full Subject interviews.
1 Like
Top Secret clearance
I believe its the latter. I could tell just from talking to my original BI during the subject interview that she seemed kinda flippant. Originally, I was told that I needed a follow-up regarding obtained info, but it ended up being the whole interview all over again.
Ah okay that makes sense! Does anyone believe that the issue that required a follow-up could get my clearance denied? I know the “whole person” is taken into account, but that’s a vague concept IMO.
Last year I had to re-do a subject interview for an investigator who had to take an emergency leave of absence before he was able to type the report. I was told that I would not be allowed to use his notes to type up the report, so I would have to conduct the interview all over again and use my own notes for the report due to whatever guidelines are in place for us contractors. The subject wasn’t happy at all about having to be reinterviewed.