NECRO what do they look for when obtaining a secret security clearance? NECRO

[TallBill]

they are just fact checking, be completely honest.

Yup, I used to work for a contractor that conducted clearances for the federal government among others. People who had severe criminal charges probably wouldn't get a clearance regardless. But we had people who would lie or leave of smaller charges and not get a clearance because of it.

 

[drinkmorejava]

As I am reading through these responses I am as confused as when I started. I was hired to be a medical coder on an Air Force Base. I submitted all of the information for the clearance. After telling me they go back 10, which I have absolutely nothing, they went back 23 years and denied me access over a misdemeanor charge. I feel it is very unfair. Is there any way to dispute or at least plead my case? How would I contact the surgeon general?

To actually answer your question.

Yes, there is an appeal process. Just google it. You should have received a statement of rebuttal explaining why it was denied.

 

[freeskier93]

As I am reading through these responses I am as confused as when I started. I was hired to be a medical coder on an Air Force Base. I submitted all of the information for the clearance. After telling me they go back 10, which I have absolutely nothing, they went back 23 years and denied me access over a misdemeanor charge. I feel it is very unfair. Is there any way to dispute or at least plead my case? How would I contact the surgeon general?

I don't remember it saying anything about only going back 10 years on criminal history (then again I breezed right through that section). Do you really think it's unfair that they go back further in criminal history?

The only thing I remember asking to go back 10 years was for residence history and work history.

EDIT: Taking a look at the SF86 they actually only ask for 7 years in the police record section, however, I'm not sure why you would assume the FBI would ONLY look at or take into consideration your entire criminal record for just the past 7 years, that would be absurd...

 

[boomhower]

I don't remember it saying anything about only going back 10 years on criminal history (then again I breezed right through that section). Do you really think it's unfair that they go back further in criminal history?

The only thing I remember asking to go back 10 years was for residence history and work history.

EDIT: Taking a look at the SF86 they actually only ask for 7 years in the police record section, however, I'm not sure why you would assume the FBI would ONLY look at or take into consideration your entire criminal record for just the past 7 years, that would be absurd...

It would be wrong if they asked to him to only disclose for a certain time frame but go back farther than asked and deny for failing to disclose it. If he did what they asked then he should be good. He wasn't dishonest or trying to hide it, only did what was asked. But make damn sure you read it right.

 

[IBMJunkman]

Back in the late 60s my high school buddy lived with us. After graduation he joined the Air Force. After basic he went to SAC in Omaha. My mother and I were visited by, I think, the FBI asking about him. The one thing I remember them asking is if he talked in his sleep. He got his clearance even though his older brother was active in the SDS at the time.

 

[tcsenter]

Request the reason they denied you or at the least get a copy of your own arrest/criminal history from every county you've ever lived. Could be something on there that you're not aware of, something erroneous.

Someone I know was once questioned during a criminal investigation. He was NOT arrested, NOT booked, NOT charged, he was asked to come to the police station for questioning and he did. The disposition of the complaint was that there was insufficient evidence to substantiate that a crime occurred = no charges. But due to an error in the reports filed by the investigating officer, it went on his record as being arrested and detained. So when he was responding "NO" on the security clearance and job applications if he had ever been arrested, they concluded that was a dishonest answer.

He had been to several job interviews and passed over with no explanation in spite of being very qualified. The only way he discovered it was that one interviewer specifically asked him about this discrepancy. It had happened like 16 years prior.

 

[freeskier93]

It would be wrong if they asked to him to only disclose for a certain time frame but go back farther than asked and deny for failing to disclose it. If he did what they asked then he should be good. He wasn't dishonest or trying to hide it, only did what was asked. But make damn sure you read it right.

Why do you assume that as long as you're not dishonest it's automatic approval? It's definitely a big part of it but surely you two aren't naive enough to think they give you a pass on anything just because you're honest.

Obviously if he gets back the reason for denial being failure to disclose that's fucked up, but that seems unlikely. More likely they didn't like what the misdemeanor was and it posed a risk.