|
Skandiaavity posted:For DS, your first tour (or two tours?) are mandatory domestic U.S. assignment. If you want AIP i think they are a mid-level or higher career move for special agents. At least, the only DS Agents I have spoken to that served there. Caveat: The first tour is SUPPOSED to be domestic. The vast majority of the time this is true, but it's not always. I also know people who have joined DS, done one domestic tour and immediately gone to nasty places for their next tour, so it does happen.
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 03:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 17:30 |
|
|
Skandiaavity posted:Some clarification; I need to make a few corrections here regarding DS assignments. Your first post (right out of BSAC) is TYPICALLY a domestic post at one of our larger field offices. There are times when people are taken from training right into the Secretary's Detail or some other "non-traditional" first-tour post. Also, it is extremely easy to get AIP as your second tour. With trends being what they currently are, it's almost the only way to make sure you make it out overseas for your second tour and beyond. Additionally, it is very easy to get TDY's to "high threat posts" (including AIP) during your first tour. It's not uncommon for DS Agents to take positions of a higher rank; this is called a stretch tour. Those are less common at the entry level.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 03:46
|
|
|
as you can see, it depends . (Thanks for the clarifications. The only DS SA's I've spoken to told me it was the opposite trends for AIP now, since pretty much everyone is doing the rounds.) But yeah, it's easy to get TDY or posted to dangerous areas, in almost any field, since nobody else really wants them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 03:51
|
|
|
problematique posted:Sent! Reply sent to your .gov 
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 04:15
|
|
|
psydude posted:How does that work with the implementations the embassies run? Are they exempt under diplomatic regulations? You probably can get an answer to that at FSI 
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 04:16
|
|
|
Skandiaavity posted:Some clarification; Bruxism posted:I need to make a few corrections here regarding DS assignments. Thanks guys, and Tyro and 1of7 too. Bruxism's reply seems most in line from what I've heard. I'm not expecting to get an AIP post as a first posting, and I wouldn't want to, to be frankly honest. I'd appreciate a domestic posting for the time to learn the down in the dirt busywork and procedure that every DS agent I'm sure loves to hate, because having to pick it up in the sandbox would be adding pain to misery I think. I especially wouldn't mind an A-RSO billet at a large(r) overseas post for my second tour, because RSO work is what most interests me and being an A-RSO at a larger post seems to be the most unlikely to overwhelm from the first day. Good training, in other words, and a lot of wiser minds to draw on if needed. Again, really appreciate the detailed replies--SA has been the most responsive and reliable source of info for me outside of the State Department itself.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 06:21
|
|
|
psydude posted:How does that work with the implementations the embassies run? Are they exempt under diplomatic regulations? Sort of -- the statute actually doesn't outlaw VPNs so we'd be good anyway, but there is a practical exemption for embassies against filtering and censorship methods; only at work though -- at home, for instance, I can't access Dropbox, IMGUR, t.co, bit.ly, Washington Post, or other sites that are filtered, and OpenVPN is blocked (you have to use L2TP or whatever it is called, the older protocol). HiroProtagonist posted:What qualifies as "bidding over your level?" Does this apply to overseas billets, i.e. are AIP bids for your first overseas posting is seen as having "promotion potential?" I didn't know that it was possible to bid for specific positions, rather than just specific posts (and then being placed in a "best fit" billet, or something). Do you know what's available at a given post before bidding (and thus by necessity incorporate that into the bids given to the CDO), or is it just say, "here's X countries; pick your top three?" You bid on specific jobs, at a specific grade. If you're an -03 and you are bidding on an -02 position, that's bidding over your level, it's a "stretch" bid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 06:30
|
|
|
TCD posted:You probably can get an answer to that at FSI You'd think that, but I'm starting to discover otherwise. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 13:12
|
|
|
I was thinking of starting up a (state-only) VPN unit with a box / point of origin in oregon, so we could all effectively have home-bound VPN. would have to double check the protocols too. but the main issue i'm going to have to look at is bandwidth. Anyway: Interest check? (Legality/FAH/FAM check?)
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 14:35
|
|
|
Why Oregon? Also, while cool, I just ended up shelling out a few bucks for Witopia, and can get gateways to all major cities in the US, plus most of Europe and Asia as needed (helpful for MMOs for region-restrictions, or just to get a better server.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 14:47
|
|
|
Skandiaavity posted:I was thinking of starting up a (state-only) VPN unit with a box / point of origin in oregon, so we could all effectively have home-bound VPN. would have to double check the protocols too. but the main issue i'm going to have to look at is bandwidth. A few points: a residential-grade line won't be enough to support multiple VPN connections. At a minimum, you'll want business cable with a SLA; ideally you'd want business fiber, which might be cost-prohibitive, but might be attainable if you have enough demand (50+ personnel). Another option might be to set up multiple boxes and lines with a round-robin DNS implementation for load balancing. I guess you could also just a rent a server in a datacenter, although certain countries might outright block all subnets owned by a particular hosting company and vice versa. psydude fucked around with this message at 17:41 on Dec 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 17:22
|
|
|
psydude posted:You'd think that, but I'm starting to discover otherwise. Wha? Odd..
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 18:32
|
|
|
I'm going to take the FSOT a second time this summer. I just graduated from college. A few questions: I got the official reading list that the State Department recommends. Now, what else would you recommend, or what would you recommend in lieu of it? I also got a subscription to the Economist. I'm going to practice writing speed essays as well, this really got me the last time. One note of concern, I'm going to be in Turkey starting in April, I assume I can take the test in Istanbul?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 22:19
|
|
|
Gumog posted:I'm going to take the FSOT a second time this summer. I just graduated from college. A few questions: I'd recommend regularly reading the FP and domestic political sections of the Washington Post, but that's just me. If you have a Kindle or the Kindle app on an iPad, you can get WaPo every day for dirt cheap, like $10/month. You need to register to take the test in Turkey, but it's no problem, do it through the same system for registering domestically - it's offered almost every cycle in Istanbul, Ankara, or both.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 23:03
|
|
|
psydude posted:A few points: a residential-grade line won't be enough to support multiple VPN connections. I don't know about that these days. I have several friends in Chattanooga with 100MB or greater residential fiber lines. I would think that could handle quite a few connections. I have to second the "Why Oregon?" question. With VPN becoming more difficult I'm thinking of just leaving a computer behind & using SSH, VNC, TeamViewer, or some other such technology as it seems they are not trying to block those.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 23:06
|
|
|
1of7 posted:I don't know about that these days. I have several friends in Chattanooga with 100MB or greater residential fiber lines. I would think that could handle quite a few connections. The biggest issue with residential fiber is that its upload speed is usually substantially slower than its download speed. In VPN implementations, the upload speed from the server is more important than the download speed. They might be running 100/100, but it's pretty rare. But if it's available in the area, then hey, problem solved! The other issue is that ISPs run dynamic DHCP for residential customers, although this is remedied by paying a bit more for a static IP. psydude fucked around with this message at 23:19 on Dec 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 23:15
|
|
|
It started at 100/100 & they have had free bumps at least once, so I'm not sure of their current speed. Looks like symmetrical gigabit is about $300/month.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2012 23:35
|
|
|
Hello. I am current active duty military, and am interested in an FS job. I have about a year on my contract left, and am planning on going to grad school for International Relations, or some similar program, when I get out. My question is this; I realize competition is scarce for these posts, but I think I can make it if I do well in grad school. What bullet points would I be looking to hit to make myself the most attractive candidate while in school?
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 00:03
|
|
|
Beria posted:Hello. I am current active duty military, and am interested in an FS job. I have about a year on my contract left, and am planning on going to grad school for International Relations, or some similar program, when I get out. You should be looking at grad school with other options in mind besides the FS. If your goal is to join the FS, I'd recommend start taking the FSOT sooner.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 00:16
|
|
|
"Why oregon" = that's where the fiber & datacenter's at (and also someone i know there who can be on standby if stuff goes down). Really just a matter of conveinence. It would be a static IP; just gathering an interest check is all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 00:47
|
|
TCD posted:You should be looking at grad school with other options in mind besides the FS. If your goal is to join the FS, I'd recommend start taking the FSOT sooner. I would like to, but I have a pretty mediocre undergrad gpa, and would like to do something, anything, that could get me a good civillian job in the government.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 01:08
|
|
|
Beria posted:I would like to, but I have a pretty mediocre undergrad gpa, and would like to do something, anything, that could get me a good civillian job in the government. I'm not sure how much your GPA is taken into account during the FS process. There's really no downside to trying the FSOT process.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 01:19
|
|
|
Beria posted:Hello. I am current active duty military, and am interested in an FS job. I have about a year on my contract left, and am planning on going to grad school for International Relations, or some similar program, when I get out. It's kind of a wrong approach. The only thing that will make you a more attractive candidate is well, yourself. BEX really doesn't care about your GPA much or which school you're from, it's all the same to them. Thinking of the process like any other job interview is where a lot of people fail. Taking the FSOT now has no penalties (i.e. if you take it 3, 4, or even 8 times, there's no negative stigma attached to it since H.R. doesn't actually see your package until you make it on the register.) By taking it now, it prepares you on what to expect, which is will be far more valuable to you than making yourself 'an attractive candidate'. That, and coming from experience, it's a really long process. Seriously.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
Ok, cool. Thanks y'all! I'll keep this in mind!
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 01:36
|
|
|
Is there any general animosity between DS agents and FSOs? I've been reading a lot of complaints from FSOs about DS agents pulling their security clearances in what the see as "power moves." I even read an article where an FSO suggested that spouses should be given the job of checking security clearances over DS agents. I've also heard some rumblings about general personality differences between most FSOs and DS agents. A DS agent indicated to me that while going through the BEX I should take care to present my military experience properly because many FSOs are concerned about the militarization of DS, and that the FSO on the board might ding me for it. I've also heard that some FSOs have a bit of an elitist attitude and see themselves as somehow superior to specialists. Finally, I've heard there's some dissatisfaction because DS agents of equal grade to their generalist counterparts make significantly more money with the inclusion of LEAP and OT. Finally, the FSO recruiter I was chatting to the other day didn't seem pleased when I indicated I was also interested in DSS. I know I'm generalizing here, and that its likely the majority of FSOs/DS agents get along without any friction. However, I've heard these tidbits from many different sources, albeit largely secondhand. I'm kind of looking for a between the lines examination of the relationship between the two groups. Most law enforcement/FSO forums dismiss such allegations and throw out some official "all is peachy" answer. I was hoping that the goon community could give me a little more. Thanks
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 02:53
|
|
|
Ignoranceisbliss88 posted:Is there any general animosity between DS agents and FSOs? I've been reading a lot of complaints from FSOs about DS agents pulling their security clearances in what the see as "power moves." I even read an article where an FSO suggested that spouses should be given the job of checking security clearances over DS agents. I've also heard some rumblings about general personality differences between most FSOs and DS agents. A DS agent indicated to me that while going through the BEX I should take care to present my military experience properly because many FSOs are concerned about the militarization of DS, and that the FSO on the board might ding me for it. I've also heard that some FSOs have a bit of an elitist attitude and see themselves as somehow superior to specialists. Finally, I've heard there's some dissatisfaction because DS agents of equal grade to their generalist counterparts make significantly more money with the inclusion of LEAP and OT. Finally, the FSO recruiter I was chatting to the other day didn't seem pleased when I indicated I was also interested in DSS. My relations with DS agents have been overwhelmingly positive. I count many as my friends, and I've always enjoyed their company. It's worth noting that I've gone out of my way to get to know them and spend time with them, so I have no idea how it is if one just cruises along with minimal contact. On the other hand, I one time was at the receiving end of a very poorly run DS investigation, and it was very Kafkaesque. Everything worked out in the end, but only because the person actually responsible for the event in question came forward and admitted to it; I'm not sure how things would have gone if they hadn't. So, good SAs are awesome, but bad, or inexperienced ones, can ruin a day or a career. At the time I had lots of SA friends, but had the experience come my way before I knew so many agents well, it would have soured me on DS, probably for good. One huge problem is that DS has brought on board a huge number of new SAs, but due to current State Department needs, the first overseas experience for many of these new agents is Afghanistan or Iraq, neither of which ever should be a first overseas experience for any FS employee, generalist or specialist. Those posts just aren't anything like normal missions, and can do real damage to a new agent's development if it's the first thing they experience. The reality is what it is, but it's not optimal. I don't ever worry about State becoming militarized. State culture is so much more reasonable and enjoyable than military culture, even the most gung-ho mil types tend to embrace it. Also, no hard feelings here about LEAP, etc.; DS promotions lag waaaaaay behind generalist promotions (it's common for SAs to retire as FS-02s, for example.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 03:27
|
|
|
Yeah, count me in for positive DS experience. You realize they have the power to ruin you; but it's not like they lord it over you or anything. 9 times out of 10 they just want to be informed and often times people can have a 'my business is my business' attitude, but not be informed on how that affects clearances. In other words, DS really doesn't care if you have an affair, have an alcoholic problem, or are seeing 3 foreign nationals on the side. They'd really prefer not to investigate it, but parts of their job is to make sure you're not doing anything to jeopardize your security clearance or the mission's function. Doing things like those is a quick way to have it revoked or investigated, which is also their job to perform. They have to be the party poopers, or the people nobody likes to be in the room. It's easy to see why there is animosity. I have heard of the Generalist/Specialist thing. Yeah, some Generalist still have an upper class attitude, but 90% of the time I found most just don't care becuase we're all "in the same mud, spilling the same blood." You're actually encouraged to wander outside your cone/speciality. to pick up other areas. I've never heard of a BEX board dinging anyone for military experience. You get the opposite: points for it. But really, each DS agent - like each DCM, each Ambassador, and pretty much everyone at your post - comes with their own experiences and management styles. You can have a crappy RSO just as you could have a crappy HR Officer, or bad IMS/IMO which prevent you from doing your job. Or you can have the opposite and have a champ RSO, wonderful HR Officer and have an IMS on 24/7 standby. Every post is different, and over time, is run differently, so you can't really generalize an attitude.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 03:49
|
|
|
Ignoranceisbliss88 posted:Is there any general animosity between DS agents and FSOs? I've been reading a lot of complaints from FSOs about DS agents pulling their security clearances in what the see as "power moves." I even read an article where an FSO suggested that spouses should be given the job of checking security clearances over DS agents. I've also heard some rumblings about general personality differences between most FSOs and DS agents. A DS agent indicated to me that while going through the BEX I should take care to present my military experience properly because many FSOs are concerned about the militarization of DS, and that the FSO on the board might ding me for it. I've also heard that some FSOs have a bit of an elitist attitude and see themselves as somehow superior to specialists. Finally, I've heard there's some dissatisfaction because DS agents of equal grade to their generalist counterparts make significantly more money with the inclusion of LEAP and OT. Finally, the FSO recruiter I was chatting to the other day didn't seem pleased when I indicated I was also interested in DSS. People with pulled security clearances are such a small minority it shouldn't be representative. Anyway, my best friend here at post is DS. People joke that we're married, which is doubly funny in that my wife and his wife are friends as well. No friction, but maybe it's also because I'm relatively laid back and thus get along. I've also never heard of jealousy over LEAP -- it all balances out in the end when the FSOs aren't struggling looking for jobs as an FS-02, and also due to the fact that we don't have to fight to get non-AIP overseas assignments. Everything has its benefits and drawbacks. I think any friction you're hearing is being greatly exaggerated. As for generalists with superiority attitudes -- well, it happens. It's far from the majority, but it's just something that you have to live with. Incidentally I have seen more problems with specialists who think they can be tyrants of their own little fiefdoms and run afoul of post management, but maybe we just have relatively few problems here so those stand out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 06:14
|
|
|
Ignoranceisbliss88 posted:Is there any general animosity between DS agents and FSOs? I've been reading a lot of complaints from FSOs about DS agents pulling their security clearances in what the see as "power moves." I even read an article where an FSO suggested that spouses should be given the job of checking security clearances over DS agents. I've also heard some rumblings about general personality differences between most FSOs and DS agents. A DS agent indicated to me that while going through the BEX I should take care to present my military experience properly because many FSOs are concerned about the militarization of DS, and that the FSO on the board might ding me for it. I've also heard that some FSOs have a bit of an elitist attitude and see themselves as somehow superior to specialists. Finally, I've heard there's some dissatisfaction because DS agents of equal grade to their generalist counterparts make significantly more money with the inclusion of LEAP and OT. Finally, the FSO recruiter I was chatting to the other day didn't seem pleased when I indicated I was also interested in DSS. Lots of complaints? Not sure where you are getting this info. My previous two assignments, I was quite close to people in the DS office and never really observed what you are stating. There's personalities at posts, that's for sure, but it's not so much a specialist vs generalist (I've seen that a few times, but it's not so much aimed at DS specifically). I've also seen personality clashes in a specific generalist office as well as specialist offices... the overseas environment is a funny environment with all sorts of quirks, however I'd question some of your second hand info as it doesn't match mine or my friends experiences all that much.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 07:25
|
|
|
TCD posted:Lots of complaints? They've mostly been gleaned from a lot of various internet forums and a few other second hand sources. I haven't put much merit to them, but I've heard it enough to become curious. I ask the question mostly because I feel that goons would be the best source for an "off the record" answer from both FSO and DS agents. Every profession/organization has its quirks and I'm just exploring some of the State Department's after exhausting pretty much every other topic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 09:00
|
|
|
Honest, it sounds like some of those forums were probably posted by people with bitter experience. While the FS has a crazy high retention rate, there is always some bad experiences, or maybe the FS didn't quite 'live up' to those peoples expectations. Some people join DS and leave immediately after without getting a proper feel for it, becuase having the DS credentials, is apparently worth a lot in federal law enforcement jobs. It's not unheard of for agents to make it all the way through and quit after training/first posting. (and likewise for FSO because the lifestyle wasn't exactly what they had in mind) Some other people just meet with DS/DSS while on contracts, which has a different approach and attitude to it, it is more militarized in that sense. They can be pretty tough with first impressions. For pay issues, well, if you're arguing about pay in a federal job, i think its moot regardless what position you're in. People will talk about grades (i.e. FS-2,-3, etc) but not steps (actual salary); I haven't ever heard of anyone internally bitching about salary aside from COLA adjustments or from folks in DC; (as a local hire i admit it's skewed on that front, we get screwed while out-of-the-beltway folks get a good start.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 09:25
|
|
|
I'm sure this has been answered at some point, but if I already have clearance will that facilitate getting a State clearance at all? Or does it really have no effect?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 16:00
|
|
|
CherryCola posted:I'm sure this has been answered at some point, but if I already have clearance will that facilitate getting a State clearance at all? Or does it really have no effect? Unless it's a DoE clearance, a clearance is a clearance regardless of who issued it. I have seen some contracts that require applicants to be re-cleared with State as the sponsoring agency, but that's rare. If you've used EQIP before and you need to upgrade from a Secret to a TS, all of your previous information will be in there when you go to fill out the form again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 16:06
|
|
|
psydude posted:Unless it's a DoE clearance, a clearance is a clearance regardless of who issued it. I have seen some contracts that require applicants to be re-cleared with State as the sponsoring agency, but that's rare. If you've used EQIP before and you need to upgrade from a Secret to a TS, all of your previous information will be in there when you go to fill out the form again. Oh sweet, so if I already have a TS, I'm good to go? I hope this helps my application a bit!
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 16:14
|
|
|
That's incorrect; State clearance is separate. (every agency has their own clearances) Regardless of who did your past clearance you have to go through the process again. Your prior clearance may, or may not, assist with streamlining your application. I will say from experience, that DS is very thorough/detail oriented and look for different things (places an emphasis on other things) than say, a DOD, or a DOE clearance. But yeah, your info should already be in e-QIP, if you filled out an SF-86 before just run through it again and update. That's handled by OPM. Above all else, make sure your package is consistent with your prior clearance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 16:20
|
|
|
Skandiaavity posted:That's incorrect; State clearance is separate. (every agency has their own clearances) My mistake, then. Is that a FS specific thing? GS employees and contractors working for State don't have to get re-cleared if it's been granted by another agency. psydude fucked around with this message at 16:31 on Dec 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 16:29
|
|
|
No, they do too. It's done by OPM as well. Regardless of agency, they all go to the same place (DOHA) for courts & appeals. To clarify, OPM issues all the clearances, (regardless of agency) and ultimately a branch of DOD will handle all the roo courts/prosecutions (regardless of agency). But OPM leaves it up to the discretion of each agency to issue/deny a clearance, an DOD just makes the same case for prosecution (it's up to you to prove you mitigated concerns, whatever they are). If you look over that appeal/denial site and click on a few PDFs, you can see what I mean in detail. (minor edit: OPM handles the personnel side; but each agency is responsible for establishing the criteria for meeting 'an issue' or 'a denial' of said clearances. If the person meets 'an issue', it goes to HR who submits their package to OPM. If the person meets 'a denial', it goes to OPM who will do 2 things: flat out deny your clearance, or refer it to abovementioned DOD branch for prosecution/appeal. If you satisfy the court, it goes back to OPM as an override and you're issued the clearance. Note that clearance is not suitability! ) Contractors (the sole exception: DSS contractors), to my understanding, aren't given much position of authority so they're "sweeped in" so they can get to work faster. Time is money to both, so it's kind of a "friend of a friend" trust system. If you're a GS, have valid State clearance and transfer to FSO; you'd just need to bump it up to TS. By doing so, you submit yourself to the process all over again. If you're a specialist and want to go generalist, you already have the necessary clearances. Of course, it's all a big "it depends" on the investigator you get. Some will help make your case, others will want to grill you under the light. Again, the investigator might look at your package and say "this person already has a TS from Veteran's Affairs or the Dept of Treasury, they're good to go" (a common thing in clearance renewals) or they might feel the prior investigation wasn't thorough or recent enough, which results in a do-over. Skandiaavity fucked around with this message at 17:07 on Dec 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 16:56
|
|
|
Not to get too far off topic, but does the DoD reciprocate clearances from all agencies, then? The DoS TS I'm being sponsored for is going to be recognized by USAR G1, who is currently carrying my DoD Secret.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 17:01
|
|
|
sorry if it wasn't clear.. DOS and DOD look for different criteria in issuing clearances. In theory if you have one, you shouldn't have a problem with the other as long as they're equal or below. In practice, it depends on your investigator. OPM is only the issuing authority, so you'll have State TS, which USAR will recognize, but your Army/DOD clearance won't be bumped to TS to reflect that. (guessing, because you don't have the appropriate need to know in the Army? Likewise if you have an Army TS, it doesn't give you the appropriate need to know in State) The Clearances stack (meaning they remain separated), so you can have an Army TS, a USMC TS/SCI, a State TS, a DOE TS/SSBI, A Treasury Secret, Congress PT, etc. In that case, you will have to go through the process each as many times as all look for different things. edit: but say you have <Agency> TS and need to update it to TS/SCI, /SSBI, or whatever; in practice there is a focus on only the added content (SCI/SSBI aspects) as there's no need to put you through the entire TS process over again. Unless it's been 15 years or you're going from TS to TS/Full Scope, which requires a polygraph. They'll put you through the wringer and then some on that one just to keep you honest. (furthermore, agencies can also issue "suitability"; which accounts for need to know. DHS is well known for doing this to keep it compartmentalized. So you can have a DHS TS/SCI and work for TSA. You'd not be able to look at ICE/CBP stuff since you haven't been looked at by authorized agents from ICE/CBP.) Skandiaavity fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Dec 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 17:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 17:30 |
|
|
Thanks for the explanation. From some cursory googling and going off of what you said, it looks the process involves the gaining agency putting in a request to transfer the eligibility, after which they then make the decision as to whether or not to issue the clearance (assuming a less than two year break in service). So I'd effectively wind up with a DoD TS and a DoS TS like you said.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2012 17:35
|
|