In a recent episode of the Security Clearance Careers Podcast, ClearedCast, Sean Bigley and Lindy Kyzer dive into the complexities of self-reporting in the wake of the implementation of the SEAD 3 self-reporting requirement. Despite years since its introduction, many security clearance holders are still not fully aware of the self-reporting obligations, leading to confusion and concern.
The SEAD 3 Self-Reporting Requirement: What’s Expected
SEAD 3 (Security Executive Agent Directive 3) requires security clearance holders not only to self-report their own conduct but also to report concerns regarding their colleagues. This directive is significant because it expands the responsibility of clearance holders, creating a shift from self-reporting to reporting others—something many clearance holders are uncomfortable with.
The self-reporting requirements include a wide range of issues, such as noncompliance with security regulations, unexplained affluence, substance abuse, criminal conduct, and misuse of government property. This broad scope leaves many wondering where to draw the line and who to report concerns to, especially when it comes to colleagues in other agencies or contracting firms.
Challenges in Reporting
One of the significant concerns raised in the podcast is the confusion around the reporting process itself. Many security clearance holders are uncertain about where to direct their concerns. For example, should a contractor report a government employee to their own contract security officer, and if so, how should that officer handle the information?
There is also the fear of being labeled a “snitch” and the possibility of creating tension in the workplace. As Bigley and Kyzer note, it’s essential to use judgment when considering whether to report a colleague’s behavior, especially when the information is secondhand or based on rumors.
A Collaborative Approach Needed
Bigley and Kyzer emphasize the importance of fostering a more collaborative environment in the national security community where individuals feel comfortable raising legitimate concerns without fear of retribution or judgment. Until clearer guidance is provided, many clearance holders will likely remain hesitant to report on others, potentially putting national security at risk.
As the security clearance process continues to evolve, it’s crucial that both government agencies and contractors work together to clarify these requirements and streamline the reporting process, ensuring the safety and integrity of the national security workforce.
