Here’s the situation: My current job requires a TS (which I received in 2019), employer wants me to go for a TS/SCI, saying it’s “nice to have,” but it’s not required for my current job, and is willing to sponsor me. Is there any benefit to getting a TS/SCI even though it’s not required for my job? (i.e. does it open more doors later on in career?) What about possible down sides? (i.e. if I am not favorably adjudicated for the SCI, does that impact my current TS clearance?) For context, current job is language analysis for a very hot/useful language at the moment. Thanks for the advice.
1 Like
If the SCI is for the same customer, I’d say go for it. Chances are they might just use your existing TS investigation, do some more Counter intelligence work in the background, and give you the SCI in a couple of months.
If for another customer, and they don’t want to use your >2 year old investigation, they might request a new one (or ask you to submit a SF86-C).
SCI denial for a customer may or may not result in the loss of your collateral clearance (depending on findings, severity…)
And yes, having the SCI will make you more marketable in the future (especially if you have a polygraph down the road).
As you mentioned languages (which might suggest that you may have some foreign connections of some sort), expect some extra scrutiny in your case.
If you think that you have been less than completely transparent and forthcoming in your previous investigation, and some problems are discovered during a potential polygraph, don’t do it.
That would be my advice.
Take everything I’m about to say with a grain of salt as it is based on my best understanding and may not be 100% accurate.
I would say go for it.
SCI access does open up a lot of doors and as a language analyst, there are plenty of potential jobs for you in the IC, pretty much all of which would require TS/SCI.
If you are denied SCI, I don’t think that would have an impact on your existing TS (someone fact-check me on this). SCI is not a clearance, it is a set of additional access(es) tacked on top of your existing TS clearance. In other words, SCI denial does not equate to a clearance denial.
1 Like
Technically cleared positions drive need for clearances. If your company has zero sci cleared positions with zero access to sci…somebody is not truthful. If they want to place you in an SCI required billet…that is another thing.
Yes you can fail to clear with new BI. That will impact your current clearance. Now, if you have nothing to hide in any BI area…you should clear. But I have seen folks not clear poly over how they answered something on a previous sf86. Is there risk? Yes. Potential reward in different positions? Yes.
This was my first thought when I read the initial post. For starters, there would be some falsifications going on with the AUB not to mention the wasted resources that an unnecessary investigation brings.
That I’m aware of, requests can easily be made for a bump up should it be required but much like how nice it would be to have my home telework office get a cube farm bump out so I can better feel like I’m in the office I don’t believe wishful thinking works for justifications. I could be wrong though- don’t alway bat a thousand with the recall.
1 Like
I thought the same thing, but then I remembered some big programs where they had endless billets .
As it took a LONG time for that specific customer to get through, they put people in the queue so that they could fulfill the staffing needs years down the road 
1 Like
All true. And requires sleight of hand.
Gov: we arent saying we are awarding you additional FTEs. But we support you submitting 4 for SCI with these skills. You might get future award.
Company: mo money mo money mo money
1 Like