Bill Overview
Title: Security Clearance Portability for Departing Servicemembers Act of 2022
Description: This bill addresses the security clearance of former members of the Armed Forces or former civilian employees of the Department of Defense (DOD) after separation or retirement who require security clearance for employment as covered DOD contractors. Specifically, during the one-year period following the separation or retirement, DOD must treat the previously held security clearance as an active clearance for purposes of former members or employees retaining employment with covered DOD contractors. During the two-year period following that year, DOD must ensure the adjudication of any request submitted by such employee for reactivation of a previously held security clearance for purposes of employment is completed not later than 180 days after the date of submission.
Sponsors: Rep. Bice, Stephanie I. [R-OK-5]
Target Audience
Population: Former members of the Armed Forces or DOD civilian employees seeking employment with DOD contractors
Estimated Size: 400000
- The bill affects individuals who separate or retire from the Armed Forces or DOD civilian employment.
- The target population includes those pursuing post-service employment with DOD contractors requiring security clearance.
- Each year, approximately 200,000 service members separate from the U.S. military. This number may include some civilians retiring from the DOD as well.
- Not all separating service members or DOD civilian employees will seek employment with DOD contractors, but a significant subset who do will require a security clearance.
Reasoning
- The population primarily affected by this policy consists of former military members and DOD civilians who transition to civilian roles that require security clearances. This is a niche segment yet significant given the volume of annual separations from military service and civilian employment in the DOD.
- A substantial portion of these individuals likely seek roles in industries closely linked to national security or defense, where security clearances are a prerequisite.
- Given the policy's focus on improving employment prospects by easing security clearance transitions, the impact is expected to be primarily positive among those utilizing this benefit.
- With an annual military separation rate of approximately 200,000, and additional DOD civilian retirements, the affected population, who might actively seek DOD contractor roles, can be considerable but not overwhelmingly large.
- The budget considerations appear adequate given the limited scope in terms of population size and the administrative nature of the policy. Costs would predominantly cover processing and admin tasks associated with maintaining and reactivating security clearances.
- Presented wellbeing scores reflect how the policy enhances job prospects, potentially impacting economic stability and personal wellbeing positively amongst this demographic.
Simulated Interviews
IT Specialist (Norfolk, Virginia)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is beneficial because it helps me maintain continuity in my new job without security clearance hiccups.
- I felt a sense of stability knowing my clearance was still recognized post-service.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cybersecurity Analyst (San Diego, California)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy makes it easier to transition into a civilian job that aligns with my military career.
- The quicker security clearance process relieves stress during the job hunt.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Logistics Manager (Fayetteville, North Carolina)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy significantly reduces the downtime between military and civilian employment.
- It eases fear of losing job opportunities due to clearance issues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Intelligence Consultant (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is critical because it prevents interruptions in my consultancy work that demands a security clearance.
- Efficiency in reactivating the clearance is beneficial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Project Manager (Austin, Texas)
Age: 36 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It incentivizes taking on roles aligned with my military experience without the hassle of clearance delays.
- Provides job security and reduces transition stress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Engineer (Colorado Springs, Colorado)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A smooth security clearance process is crucial to perform my role effectively without undue stress.
- The policy changes are a relief and offer more reliability in job planning.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Policy Advisor (Arlington, Virginia)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy seems to support steady career transitions.
- Reduces the anxiety associated with clearance timelines when switching to civilian roles.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Defense Contractor Representative (Huntsville, Alabama)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.5 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy aids in maintaining career momentum without unnecessary clearance delays.
- Feels comforting to know there’s an official measure protecting clearance status post-retirement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Analyst (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Skeptical about policy effectiveness, but hopeful it eases transition issues.
- Concerned about real-world application and support when seeking private roles.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Communications Specialist (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.5 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy simplifies administrative hurdles, though not everyone is aware of these benefits.
- Feel optimistic about future roles due to improved security clearance assurances.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $35000000)
Year 2: $31000000 (Low: $26000000, High: $36000000)
Year 3: $32000000 (Low: $27000000, High: $37000000)
Year 5: $35000000 (Low: $29000000, High: $39000000)
Year 10: $40000000 (Low: $33000000, High: $45000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- DOD must upgrade and maintain systems to handle security clearance process effectively.
- The bill targets a specific and sizable cohort of transitioning military personnel and DOD civilians each year.
- There will be a need to balance rapid clearance processing with national security considerations.