Interim Secret Clearance

DatabaseHead

Had a couple of questions in regards to Interim Secret Clearances.  

First of all this role I accepted requires a secret clearance, this has been initiated already.  I'm under the impression I will be able to start the role once the interim has been approved.  The agency said this can take up to 1 month....   How much longer does the real deal take?  3 months?

After reading the website some factors that could take you longer is living outside the country etc.....   

mikey88

1-3 months for interim and 9-12 months for final adjudication. Keep in mind these are typical time frames and don't apply to every applicant. Also, verify that you are able to start with an Interim as it's not always the case.

Finally, there is a chance you may be denied an interim in rare cases but approved for a final; so keep that in mind. 

ClearanceJobs Blog 
is also a good resource for anything clearance related.

DatabaseHead

Mikey thanks for this information.  I just reached out to the contracts security team they said I am clear to start once the investigation is opened.....   Sounds like by the end of this week I'll be able to start.  

kaiju

It really depends on the position. If the position only requires a Secret NACLC you should be able to start as soon as you get the interim. Sometimes jobs that need a Secret SSBi require that the clearance to be fully adjudicated before giving you full access to the system/network. 

DatabaseHead

ADP/IT-II

TechGuru80

kaiju said:

It really depends on the position. If the position only requires a Secret NACLC you should be able to start as soon as you get the interim. Sometimes jobs that need a Secret SSBi require that the clearance to be fully adjudicated before giving you full access to the system/network. 

There is no such thing as an SSBI for a Secret....if you have an SSBI then it's for Top Secret....or if you had an SSBI but hold a Secret, then you had a TS and were downgraded because you only needed Secret.

https://news.clearancejobs.com/2013/09/08/ssbi/

kaiju

Actually, there is Secret SSBI. One of my old jobs required all techs to have at least SSBI. Techs who only had NACLC but did not rate TS/SCI had to do the investigation for SSBI. Some were actually upgraded to TS/SSBI while others were only upgraded from NACLC to SSBI. In most cases Secret SSBI is the result of being downdraded from TS/SSBI or TS/SCI. Secret SSBI can be easily upgraded to TS while Secret without SSBI requires a completely new investigation. I know this for a FACT and not just secondhand info. 

DatabaseHead

Well......    My boss now knows LOL.  Eeeeek.   

COBOL_DOS_ERA

kaiju said:

Actually, there is Secret SSBI. One of my old jobs required all techs to have at least SSBI. Techs who only had NACLC but did not rate TS/SCI had to do the investigation for SSBI. Some were actually upgraded to TS/SSBI while others were only upgraded from NACLC to SSBI. In most cases Secret SSBI is the result of being downdraded from TS/SSBI or TS/SCI. Secret SSBI can be easily upgraded to TS while Secret without SSBI requires a completely new investigation. I know this for a FACT and not just secondhand info. 

Thanks for the info, now I know my 2008 Secret NACLC was actually an SSBI. My FSO couldn't say a thing about that at that time.

shochan

I thought having a "secret" anything wasn't supposed to be talked about...LOL!

DatabaseHead

NetworkNewb said:

shochan said:

I thought having a "secret" anything wasn't supposed to be talked about...LOL!

The first rule of Secret Clearance... 

Great insights.   0 value add.

Are you going to correct me for jay walking next?  

Why don't you correct the other dozen or so people who asked?   I went through some previous post and I didn't see you trolling those post.....

On a positive note.....   I turned down the position for another one.  The new one aligns with architecture and EDW integration.... 

mikey88

shochan said:

I thought having a "secret" anything wasn't supposed to be talked about...LOL!

There was an article a while back about thousands of LinkedIn profiles openly advertising their TS/SCI  

paul78

mikey88 said:

shochan said:

I thought having a "secret" anything wasn't supposed to be talked about...LOL!

There was an article a while back about thousands of LinkedIn profiles openly advertising their TS/SCI  

Yeah. I remember something similar.

It's actually kinda interesting question. Enough that I poked around the interwebs. It looks like at some point, it was considered bad practice to disclose if you have a secret clearance in public if you could be identified. Although, it looks like that guidance may not be true anymore, if anyone knows for sure?

I assume it's ok to hijack the thread since @databasehead took another job.

JDMurray

I use to have my old TS/SSBI listed on my LinkedIn profile. I was doxxed in the OPM hack so I figured listing it couldn't hurt me anymore than the Federal gov'ment's lack of security already did. The upside is I do not need to fill out a job application in China because they already know everything about me--including my fingerprints. Thanks Obama! 

EANx

paul78 said:

It looks like at some point, it was considered bad practice to disclose if you have a secret clearance in public if you could be identified. Although, it looks like that guidance may not be true anymore, if anyone knows for sure?

A lot depends on the policies of the agency involved. Many assumptions in this forum begin and end with DOD but there are 17 national intelligence agencies and fewer than half are DOD. Others include subsets of DOJ like the FBI, DHS, DOE and of course, CIA.

paul78

EANx said:

A lot depends on the policies of the agency involved. Many assumptions in this forum begin and end with DOD but there are 17 national intelligence agencies and fewer than half are DOD. Others include subsets of DOJ like the FBI, DHS, DOE and of course, CIA.

Thanks @EANx. I thought that non-national intelligence agencies also conducted security clearances such as DOE and DOT. Is that true? Are security clearances different depending on agency and who needs a clearance? I thought OPM conducted all clearances except for the DOD which is conducted by DSS.

My only exposure with a federal agency was pre-9/11 and my recollection was that cyber-security and clearances were quite arbitrary. Back then the EO's and previous EO's on classified information wasn't as mature as in recent years. I worked as a security consultant on some critical nationwide infrastructure and my work product was classified but I never underwent a clearance. I often found that to be very odd. 

Does the US government actually conduct the security clearances? I always thought it was out-sourced based on the news about the snafu with Kroll.

mikey88

paul78 said:

I thought that non-national intelligence agencies also conducted security clearances such as DOE and DOT. Is that true? Are security clearances different depending on agency and who needs a clearance? I thought OPM conducted all clearances except for the DOD which is conducted by DSS. 

Intel agencies like to do their own investigations. Now to confuse people further, OPM does the investigation but DSS adjudicates clearances - for DoD atleast.

paul78

mikey88 said:

Intel agencies like to do their own investigations. Now to confuse people further, OPM does the investigation but DSS adjudicates clearances - for DoD atleast.

Thanks. That actually makes some sense. Risk principals would dictate that the risk cannot be transferred so accountability for final judgement should stay with the agency requesting the service from OPM.

DatabaseHead

Wow talking about being confused.  @NetworkNewb  Sorry didn't get the joke, all love.....

TBH the facility I would be working in has lots of rumors of lead and other chems.....   This other place is a mid sized company looking to grow, more my speed.

COBOL_DOS_ERA

HAHA!! @JDMurray welcome to the club of OPM Hack!! same S*** happened to me too. I'm not pissed at 44. I'm pissed at those incompetent fools, (hopefully) who used to work at OPM.