Security Clearance/SF86 question

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe your siblings are hiding something

Um after the most recent cyber hack of eQIP I don't blame relatives for not wanting to cooperate. It's one thing for the OP to provide her data because she wants the job. It's another for her siblings to have to expose their information.

This is a federal investigation, they are screwing you and themselves.

They are not screwing themselves as they are not the cause of the investigation. It's too bad our government was unable to secure PII data for millions of people. And then refused to disclose the detail initially and then contuially dragged their feet on telling the truth.

Cool story but a clearance is privilege and refusal to cooperate over fears of data security is not valid and will be noted in your permanent file as well as the relative refusing.

[Anonymous]

It's really not a big deal. It's your responsibility to provide what information you can, and to do it honestly. There is no need to go beyond basic requests, and then report the information you have. When you're filling out the form, 'don't know' means simply that YOU don't know. Your investigator will probably ask you about it in your interview, and then you can say that you asked and they declined to provide the information, but you do know that they became naturalized citizens in ~Year (and whatever other info you know). It might slow things down, I suppose, but the length of time for investigation is so variable it's not worth thinking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe your siblings are hiding something

Um after the most recent cyber hack of eQIP I don't blame relatives for not wanting to cooperate. It's one thing for the OP to provide her data because she wants the job. It's another for her siblings to have to expose their information.

This is a federal investigation, they are screwing you and themselves.

They are not screwing themselves as they are not the cause of the investigation. It's too bad our government was unable to secure PII data for millions of people. And then refused to disclose the detail initially and then contuially dragged their feet on telling the truth.

Cool story but a clearance is privilege and refusal to cooperate over fears of data security is not valid and will be noted in your permanent file as well as the relative refusing.

GTFO. You have no idea what you are talking about. This is not the siblings investigation. They have every right to not participate and there is no effect to "their permanent file".

[Anonymous]

OP here,

I' fairly certain that their providing or not is their choice and does not effect their standing. This is a job application background check, not a criminal background check.

In my not so humble opinion, my siblings are cloistered, their critical thinking umish and often their big picture view stops within a 2,999 radius, save the occasional trips abroad for tourism and visit relatives.

As much as I am wishing the fleas of a thousand camels to infect my sibling's arm pits... it is their right to not disclose such. It's part of what we are fighting for as well. The balance of government and people and individual right.

I am fully realizing that their ill-founded obstinance hurts me, that's why I'm trying to back into understanding the process so that I might overcome their objections reasonably with clarity.

[Anonymous]

If all of your immediate family is unwilling to provide the information it is definitely going to raise red flags. They need the information to run checks on them. Maybe they can obtain the information themselves but add a boatload of extra time to your investigation. So yes, it's your relatives prerogative to choose not to provide the information but it will be detrimental to your investigation. It may not be a deal breaker but will definitely raise eyebrows. It's not unheard of for an individual relative to be uncomfortable with providing their info. But it is highly unusual for everyone to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's really not a big deal. It's your responsibility to provide what information you can, and to do it honestly. There is no need to go beyond basic requests, and then report the information you have. When you're filling out the form, 'don't know' means simply that YOU don't know. Your investigator will probably ask you about it in your interview, and then you can say that you asked and they declined to provide the information, but you do know that they became naturalized citizens in ~Year (and whatever other info you know). It might slow things down, I suppose, but the length of time for investigation is so variable it's not worth thinking about.

Thanks I appreciate it. It'll likely be fine. Don't the pop psychologists say that the profile of folks that go into these types of work usually have either seen lots of stuff or have experienced it themselves and that's why they want to do more.

The psychology being that if the world is safer, maybe their homes will be safer as well. I appreciate all your input.

~ you've been lovely, I'll be here all week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If all of your immediate family is unwilling to provide the information it is definitely going to raise red flags. They need the information to run checks on them. Maybe they can obtain the information themselves but add a boatload of extra time to your investigation. So yes, it's your relatives prerogative to choose not to provide the information but it will be detrimental to your investigation. It may not be a deal breaker but will definitely raise eyebrows. It's not unheard of for an individual relative to be uncomfortable with providing their info. But it is highly unusual for everyone to be.

Thanks, it was my two siblings. My folks provided all guarded information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If all of your immediate family is unwilling to provide the information it is definitely going to raise red flags. They need the information to run checks on them. Maybe they can obtain the information themselves but add a boatload of extra time to your investigation. So yes, it's your relatives prerogative to choose not to provide the information but it will be detrimental to your investigation. It may not be a deal breaker but will definitely raise eyebrows. It's not unheard of for an individual relative to be uncomfortable with providing their info. But it is highly unusual for everyone to be.

THIS... is what I'm looking for, if anyone has the notion that not having my two sibling's citizen information might impact my interim negatively.

I read from earlier posts that having unmitigated foreign national risk exposures does effect the interim. That it's not an clearance denial, but that an interim needs to have no obvious risk exposures, specifically in the area of foreign nationals.

I don't have such, but I do have 2 sisters that are US citizens not willing to provide such. So am trying to understand why and how to mitigate their fears so that my interim can be without obstacles.

For example, if they don't want to provide the passport, maybe their citizenship papers would be less risky? It would seem fishy for an identity thief to try and establish a line of credit - to be able to produce citizenship papers. Of course the risks are still there, information can be still constructed from that... but it might be difficult enough that they'd move on to something easier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all of your immediate family is unwilling to provide the information it is definitely going to raise red flags. They need the information to run checks on them. Maybe they can obtain the information themselves but add a boatload of extra time to your investigation. So yes, it's your relatives prerogative to choose not to provide the information but it will be detrimental to your investigation. It may not be a deal breaker but will definitely raise eyebrows. It's not unheard of for an individual relative to be uncomfortable with providing their info. But it is highly unusual for everyone to be.

THIS... is what I'm looking for, if anyone has the notion that not having my two sibling's citizen information might impact my interim negatively.

I read from earlier posts that having unmitigated foreign national risk exposures does effect the interim. That it's not an clearance denial, but that an interim needs to have no obvious risk exposures, specifically in the area of foreign nationals.

I don't have such, but I do have 2 sisters that are US citizens not willing to provide such. So am trying to understand why and how to mitigate their fears so that my interim can be without obstacles.

For example, if they don't want to provide the passport, maybe their citizenship papers would be less risky? It would seem fishy for an identity thief to try and establish a line of credit - to be able to produce citizenship papers. Of course the risks are still there, information can be still constructed from that... but it might be difficult enough that they'd move on to something easier.

What exactly are their fears?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all of your immediate family is unwilling to provide the information it is definitely going to raise red flags. They need the information to run checks on them. Maybe they can obtain the information themselves but add a boatload of extra time to your investigation. So yes, it's your relatives prerogative to choose not to provide the information but it will be detrimental to your investigation. It may not be a deal breaker but will definitely raise eyebrows. It's not unheard of for an individual relative to be uncomfortable with providing their info. But it is highly unusual for everyone to be.

THIS... is what I'm looking for, if anyone has the notion that not having my two sibling's citizen information might impact my interim negatively.

I read from earlier posts that having unmitigated foreign national risk exposures does effect the interim. That it's not an clearance denial, but that an interim needs to have no obvious risk exposures, specifically in the area of foreign nationals.

I don't have such, but I do have 2 sisters that are US citizens not willing to provide such. So am trying to understand why and how to mitigate their fears so that my interim can be without obstacles.

For example, if they don't want to provide the passport, maybe their citizenship papers would be less risky? It would seem fishy for an identity thief to try and establish a line of credit - to be able to produce citizenship papers. Of course the risks are still there, information can be still constructed from that... but it might be difficult enough that they'd move on to something easier.

What exactly are their fears?

I'm assuming it's fear, like the typical person... don't know for sure, they are not saying. Maybe because they can't intellectualize their fears. Am backing into this like a fish-bone diagram.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all of your immediate family is unwilling to provide the information it is definitely going to raise red flags. They need the information to run checks on them. Maybe they can obtain the information themselves but add a boatload of extra time to your investigation. So yes, it's your relatives prerogative to choose not to provide the information but it will be detrimental to your investigation. It may not be a deal breaker but will definitely raise eyebrows. It's not unheard of for an individual relative to be uncomfortable with providing their info. But it is highly unusual for everyone to be.

THIS... is what I'm looking for, if anyone has the notion that not having my two sibling's citizen information might impact my interim negatively.

I read from earlier posts that having unmitigated foreign national risk exposures does effect the interim. That it's not an clearance denial, but that an interim needs to have no obvious risk exposures, specifically in the area of foreign nationals.

I don't have such, but I do have 2 sisters that are US citizens not willing to provide such. So am trying to understand why and how to mitigate their fears so that my interim can be without obstacles.

For example, if they don't want to provide the passport, maybe their citizenship papers would be less risky? It would seem fishy for an identity thief to try and establish a line of credit - to be able to produce citizenship papers. Of course the risks are still there, information can be still constructed from that... but it might be difficult enough that they'd move on to something easier.

What exactly are their fears?

I'm assuming it's fear, like the typical person... don't know for sure, they are not saying. Maybe because they can't intellectualize their fears. Am backing into this like a fish-bone diagram.

Wow. Perhaps it's your attitude with them.

[Anonymous]

I'm assuming it's fear, like the typical person... don't know for sure, they are not saying. Maybe because they can't intellectualize their fears. Am backing into this like a fish-bone diagram.



Wow. Perhaps it's your attitude with them.

I can see how you might think this. But I was not judging but offering rationale for this particular instance and it was also something I've needed to accept over the last 20 years. We are very different as stated earlier, that's fine by me but for that reason we are not close. She confiscated a hard cover Simpsons Christmas comic book that I gave to my niece of 12 without telling me, because it was inappropriate.

I have many close friends that happily discuss both sides of a divergent opinion and can do that for hours. But my family member are not that. They are task oriented and very black and white. I grew up with them but we are different as day and night in our life experience and outlook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's really not a big deal. It's your responsibility to provide what information you can, and to do it honestly. There is no need to go beyond basic requests, and then report the information you have. When you're filling out the form, 'don't know' means simply that YOU don't know. Your investigator will probably ask you about it in your interview, and then you can say that you asked and they declined to provide the information, but you do know that they became naturalized citizens in ~Year (and whatever other info you know). It might slow things down, I suppose, but the length of time for investigation is so variable it's not worth thinking about.

Thanks I appreciate it. It'll likely be fine. Don't the pop psychologists say that the profile of folks that go into these types of work usually have either seen lots of stuff or have experienced it themselves and that's why they want to do more.

The psychology being that if the world is safer, maybe their homes will be safer as well. I appreciate all your input.

~ you've been lovely, I'll be here all week.

I'm the quoted poster. I do think investigators have seen and heard pretty much everything. My interactions have always been calm and professional and, if anything, really really boring. And that's for my own investigations, and as a contact for colleagues and friends. I've provided spotty information on family members (only a state for a sister, a wrong address for my father) and it was the best info I had at the time. The relevant investigator told me that if you'd otherwise not have contact with a person, don't contact them just asking for info. That's not exactly your situation, but I do think it illustrates how the info gets used as part of an investigation. SF86 info is a starting point.

I would try to lay off speculating about their motives or reasons. Not your job, and not likely to get you anywhere but frustrated and worried. They declined to provide information -- nothing more, nothing less. Give it all the emotional energy of filling out a drivers license application or some other boring and bureaucratic task. I don't mean to dismiss the security clearance process -- I do take it very seriously -- but it really helps to stick to the facts, and leave the investigating and speculating to the investigators and adjudicators.

[Anonymous]

Their naturalization information (as opposed to their passport information) is preferred. Maybe you could ask them if they weren't willing to give you the passport info if they could at least give you the naturalization info (date, location, number). Maybe that would placate their fears?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do not recall being asked for any documentation on my siblings or relative, but I am 3rd generation.

2nd generation UK- was asked for birth certs and passports.