In April 2014 a DOD Inspector General report (DODIG-2014-060) found that agencies were avoiding the “due process” requirement of Executive Order 12968, “Access to Classified Information,” in situations where a clearance applicant’s need for access to classified information was terminated.  The report stated:

We recommend that. . . in substantiated misconduct cases personnel security clearance adjudicative actions continue, even if the contractor employee has been terminated and/or no longer has access to classified information.…

A lot has been reported during the past month about the failure of the federal security clearance process as it relates to Aaron Alexis, the Washington Navy Yard shooter who murdered 12 people on September 16, 2013.

What Was Known
The Navy granted Alexis a Secret clearance in March 2008 based on an NACLC background investigation. The Navy knew from the investigation that he failed to disclose on his clearance form a May 2004 arrest for malicious mischief in Seattle, WA for which he was never prosecuted. Alexis claimed the arrest occurred because he deflated another person’s car tires and that he didn’t disclose it on his clearance form because the charge was dismissed. He also had some previously delinquent debts, but he was in the process of repaying them…

Federal agencies require individuals with security clearances to promptly report a wide range of security and suitability issues to their security officers. These requirements vary somewhat from agency to agency, but many follow the reporting requirements listed in DoD Regulation 5200.2-R, “Department of Defense Personnel Security Program.” The term, “self-reporting,” only applies to: 1) individuals with active security clearances and 2) applicants for security clearances who have already submitted a Questionnaire for National Security Positions (SF86) and are waiting on a clearance determination. Self-reporting is different from the requirement to disclose unfavorable information on an SF86 when applying for a security clearance…

Few things cause more frustration than being rejected by a prospective employer because of a “Loss of Jurisdiction” and an “Incident Report.”

When you’re terminated from a job where you held a Department of Defense (DoD) security clearance, your former employer “separates” you in the Joint Personnel Adjudication System (JPAS—the DoD security clearance database). If you were terminated from your job for cause, the employer often concurrently submits an Incident Report via JPAS describing the reason for termination. This occurs when the termination is related to one of the thirteen Adjudicative Guidelines for Determining Eligibility for Access to Classified Information…

All security clearance requests sent from the Defense Industrial Security Clearance Office (DISCO) to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) for investigation are submitted using the Electronic Questionnaires for Investigations Processing (e-QIP). OPM’s e-QIP has error catching and data validation features, but these features are unable to prevent many types of errors and omissions. DISCO and OPM only reject clearance requests with obvious and serious errors. From October 2007 to January 2011 the average combined rejection rate was 12.3%. Those requests that pass DISCO and OPM review are still often rife with other errors and omissions. Applicants and their Facility Security Officers (FSO) are primarily responsible for this problem…