Security Clearances

I was convicted of a Federal Misdemeanor in March 2016. I was given 1 year probation. I’m still paying restitution. It is the only record I have. Will I ever be able to receive a security clearance? If so, which ones?

Should I only pursue jobs that say Not Required, Other, etc?

Every case is different. A felony or misdemeanor is not an automatic disqualifier for anything other than special level clearances sci, ssbi, whiskey.

You said when you were convicted, you never said when the offense occurred. As courts go through processes it could be a long time between the offense and the indictment/charge and the conviction. Time is a mitigating factor, being on probation is also a ding, go look up the adjudication guidelines for police/criminal records and see how it can help you.

Good luck

Offense occurred in 2013

It might be mitigated at this point. its been almost 6 years since it occurred.

When filling out the SF86 they ask for the offense date and the conviction date (I THINK they ask the date you are charged as well).

from my understanding they care the most about the offense date, than when they finally dispose of your case because not everybody has a rocket docket to speed cases along.

For instance my offense date was 2006, i was indicted in 2010, and was sentenced in 2015. a nine year span. I couldn’t even remember what they indicted me for back in 2010, I had to read the actual indictment and called my boss asking him what the heck happened. so the time line for me was about 12 years post offense, 8 years post indictment, and 3 years post conviction.

anyway good luck

Wow, thanks for chiming in Needhelp. Did you receive the clearance after that? 5 years between sentencing…that is cruel and unusual in my eyes as it would keep you from gainful employment for far longer than the original charge may have been considered. I’ve seen where the courts automatically dismiss charges due to the length of time. OP, can you tell us a bit more about the charges? I’m a firm believer the nature of the offense and circumstances come into play on this. Technical violations can be easily cast aside more important charges are given heavier weight. If it has been 6 years I would say you are entering “the sweet spot.” I had a Polygrapher tell me “3 years is old, 5 years is really old, and 7 to 10 it falls off the map.” Being at the far end of that timeline puts you in a much better place. But NeedHelp had a good point on the various marker points in your process. If it was closed out 6 years ago completely, I think chances are high if…you maintained excellent credit since, have no other charges, or recreational drug use. Even minor “other” violations add up fast in the whole person construct, and imperfect humans are making judgement calls.

No I haven’t heard anything since the investigator called me and told me he sent my file to NBIB the week before thanksgiving.

I would go ask my FSO to look into it, but we had some friction the week I was suspended and I try to avoid her.

I would assume that she would inform me if a SOR hits her desk.

I am curious because my codefendant passed her naci and got her cac . She’s currently being processed for her public trust.

I appreciate the feedback. I have been avoiding certain jobs because I didn’t know if I’d be wasting my time. Are they harder on you if you had a clearance before the charges/conviction? I had a 5C Public Trust. I was advised to resign for personal reasons. But was told by my PO nothing indicated that I couldn’t reapply in the future.

Needshelp: My client usually sends the SOR to the person directly, about 60 days later. The FSO MAY get a revocation notice. Be calm if you get that. Don’t give them a reason to add obstacles to a potential appeal and return if it happens. Sounds somewhat promising if the co-defendant was cleared. Unless they put the onus on you. Getting bad news of a suspension is never a good thing, but how one responds in these situations can determine the path forward.

OP: I think for a Public Trust you are definitely entering the zone. At 7 years it makes it worth your while seeking Secret positions. Just make sure the finances and recreational areas are well within tolerance. Time is the great mitigator for most.

November 18, The investigator said I must have passed suitability for me to get to the personal interview.

The suspension was her going to hr about my felony in Jun 18 thinking I hid it from them. Which I didn’t. I was never asked about it and it didn’t show on my background. Only reason they found out was due to my sf86 she reviewed.

I would get a revocation even if I’m working non-cleared work? Is that a notice to suspend me or something?

@Marko do you know how adjudicators would view my situation?

Many factors considered, position, type of offense, reason for it happening, age at the time, etc…but certainly can be overcome. Can’t say more without knowing more.

The place where Security and HR collide. All the time. HR keeps PII from Security, believing they are skilled enough to know when to tell the FSO or Security Manager. The reality is they likely should engage the FSO right away, let the FSO make a call. Adverse reporting is an area fraught with potential errors and mistakes. And it has life altering consequences. When I started with this client, the previous security manager ceded all control to HR. The HR person was in way over their head, making “bodies in the seat” her priority over security concerns. It was constant HR/Security friction to the point of requiring corporate HR to step in repeatedly. Fast forward 7 years, new HR, we work seamlessly together with Security as the overarching concern. It is best to over report than under report.

Hi amberbunny, question for you please ; after almost 4 years of waiting with complete silence (I mean no personal interview , no phone call from investigator, no references were contacted or previous employers, nothing) I called my FSO this morning to ask him about any updates in my status like I do every month or two. he said nothing new , no new updates, then he called me back after an hour and said “you know what you got a denial last week” and like I said nothing happened during the course of the “investigation” except for a poly in 2016, so does it make any sense that they issue a decision without even doing the investigation or at least interview the person? thanks

Well the FSO is who pushed for my suspension, and tried to dump me. in terms of recruitment I passed the 7 year background check, credit check, driver review, and education check.

The SF86 where I listed my felony and the FSO ran to HR on me, I was suspended literally the day after I submitted my SF86.

I certainly think/thought I was clear-able at the time I submitted for the job, based on adjudication guidelines.

Now every time I walk past her I get this fake smile and a polite hello. As far as I’ve been told nobody really likes her and she doesn’t speak to people unless its their first day or its time for annual security training. I don’t think she will cut the BS until I either get cleared or I get a SOR and she thinks I’m on my way out.

To be fair…she did her job. This is where the “suitability” denials, vice Security denials come in to play. Senior leadership needs weigh in as to if they find all other conduct from you on the job as worth retaining. Think whole person. So now is not the time to get into staring matches with the FSO. We are privy to all kinds of potentially damaging info. We have an obligation to bring that info forward for the best answer from the company. If your conduct, and performance otherwise has been exceptional…you may very well pass the suitability test as well from the company. But how you respond to this situation in the here and now greatly impacts that decision. The adage “Fools rush in where Angels fear to tread,” comes to mind.

I don’t think its “to be fair”, there was nothing recent or ongoing, like drug use etc that would dictate her to act as enhanced HR. It can be seen as an abuse of power because it states that the SF86 is not use for employment decisions by the company you are hired with, its to determine suitability for the clearance.

I exposed my private life to be hired in the first place(having a felony was never asked or did I feel need to be disclosed, I figured it would have come up in my background check - obviously it didn’t, then I give 100% exposure on my SF86 for candor and it got me suspended and “we have to talk to our lawyer about your employment” jargon for a week. Then when I get back she smiles in my face with the head of human resources saying. “You are all clear welcome back” .

So it sounds like that adage applies in her case in this instance as well. The head of HR and her got into it pretty bad about me, I felt guilty about that. She ultimately quit. She reached out to me a few weeks later saying “it was just the FSO, being the FSO and overreacting, but told me to relax as my boss was excited to have me there” but its hard to be comfortable around a person who made your first month there hell-acious and who knows what’s in the back of her mind every time she sees you.

I enjoy the work and my team, I want the clearance in part to rub it in her face for causing all this drama - as she is quite frankly a symbol of society in general when it comes to people with a criminal history, and in my case its for nothing. I literally have always been a pretty boring person. my old boss and lawyers put me in a situation that caused my felony, the system isn’t too fair when it comes to minorities (when you are looking for a zebra, you tend to find it regardless of the circumstances), and before, during, and after that I am still boring.

I can tell you the HR world and the clearance world of a cleared company intersect all over the place. Don’t buy into the nonsense about it not being used to make a hiring decision. Every one of our positions are cleared and must be cleared. No clearance, or if adverse reporting is required…you do not work here. You must be escorted off the compound. So the FSO, obviously I defer to your knowledge of how she acts and is regarded, is doing her job. Aggressively so? Always possible. My previous experience here was the opposite, an extremely confrontational, power mad HR person. It took quite a while to get her removed and to take over responsibility for security things. It takes an experienced FSO to understand even serious charges take a long time for the clearance folks to act on: possession, DUI’s, use…I can send up adverse reports as required and the person works here for 6 to 8 months before they request a re-investigation. Sounds like the FSO is just over eager and anticipates a revocation on the spot…an experienced FSO would pause, determine adverse reporting is required, but understand it is a slow process. Normally only if the person has a conviction for a violent event will the client say get them out of here until resolved.

That’s exactly what our company policy and hr manual states. Any act of violence is terms for immediate suspension. She’s been the fso there for over a decade.

She even told me after my “suspension” that I will probably be adjudicated…

I don’t mean to ever defend bad behavior by anyone. I completely understand she may show “glee” when giving bad news, and that is inappropriate. 10 years is more than enough time to know how it works; some should never have power and authority over others. I see my role as help and support for employees trying to navigate a complex process. That is why I am on the forum as well. I learn a lot here and try to help as well. If I came across a felony I would be duty bound to report it. I have submitted two with felonies 10 years out and both were denied. That doesn’t mean it had everything to do with the felony. It likely had far more to do with the behavior since. Bottom line, if you have a felony, demonstrate it was an aberration and prove by conduct it was overcome. No better way than demonstrating you simply are no longer that person.

It’s good to have perspectives from lots of people on this forum. But it’s striking that of the two criminals offenders posting on this thread:

One claimed to not even remember what he was federally indicted for it was so long ago. That’s compounded by failure to take responsibility (my boss made me do it, it’s my laywer’s fault, the system is out to get me) and the mistaken belief that a felony is in any way “private.” If you’re operating under that delusion how would you respond if someone threatened to put your criminal record on blast unless you played ball? If I were in that position I’d make sure everyone and their mom knew about my misdeeds - and my acceptance of responsibility and my redemption - so it could not be used to blackmail me.

And one has conspicuously not answered the question about the nature of his federal misdemeanor offense.

1 Like