I currently hold a DoD TS clearance that was granted in June of 2018. I am going for a job that requires SAP and SCI. My background is not spotless, but I was honest with everything and was awarded a TS. Have a criminal background… 1 Felony charge that ended up being a misdemeanor conviction and two other misdemeanors from 2004.
Other than that, I have had no other issues. Will these 15+ year old issues keep me from being SCI or SAP eligible?
Nobody can say for sure. 15 years clean is a positive but they are going to be interested in the felony charge more than the plea to a misdemeanor. But, you should have been through all of that already.
It depends. See the Bonds Amendment. I believe that if you were imprisioned for more than a year, then you may not be eligible. However, there are waivers…
Normally it is a good omen having been granted a fresh TS…meaning you were vetted and deemed trustworthy. But in some cases one agency approves and the other does not. It does happen because failable human beings are evaluating the same data and reaching differing conclusions. But generally speaking I would say it is encouraging to have the TS. Some argue SAP is very different from SCI…others argue it is not. Each indicates a smaller circle of read in people on a project or it grants access to material. I see them as similar enough, at least from a Personnel Security processing point of view.
The IT manager said something about checking scattered castles to verify eligibility. Not sure what this means. How would I not be eligible unless I had undergone a previous process for SCI?
No prison time was served. Spent the night in jail and was released.
I wouldn’t worry about it. You got a TS. The rest is just paperwork
Sometimes people are not ‘read on’ for a SAP not due to security issues but due to strict limitations on the number of people who can be in access. This can be especially true in the contractor world when you work for a subcontractor and the prime contractor has to sign off… they want to keep the billets for their own people!
But isn’t that different? Lack of billets means you wouldn’t be asking the question in the first place
Don’t know, the last time I dealt with this, I seem to recall we’d put names in and hope for the best… I am not sure it is even as transparent as knowing how many billets there are.
Mind you, this is going back a few years.
Smaller programs I have worked had a known limit and you had to ask for exceptions or debrief existing to add more billets. Larger programs have been seemingly unlimited.