unescorted access

[jr]

Help me Win !!
Would be interested in any information about people being granted unescorted access to any Progress Energy Site that have a blemish in  5 year backround Check.I was denied access due to a discharged incident and am currently in the appeal process-Any Help is greatly appreciated

[JCwhitney]

Jr, my guess is that it wasn't the "blemish" on your background check that caused your UA denial but rather the lack of disclosure of it.  If I am wrong or jumping to conclusions, I apologize since I don't know the specific nature of this discrepency.  When applying for unescorted access at a nuclear facility you should disclose EVERYTHING that even has the potential to be found on a background check.  If they find something you didn't disclose, they will almost always deny you unescorted access.  However, if you disclose something that is no longer in the forefront of your life, i.e. past DUI, fitness-for-duty violation, etc., they will usually grant you access with minimal grief.  It would be a rare event you find someone that has a 'not-so-perfect' background, that was not disclosed on a Personnel History Questionnaire working at a plant.  If you do find someone like that, they would hardly be willing to come forward.  In any event, I wish you luck.  I know the unescorted access requirements seem a bit overboard, but that's the way it is.

[jr]

Unfortunately-that's not the case- I have been in business 7 years and know the rules on reporting EVERYTHIING in ones life.Denial was based on admission of "Blemish" that actually is a "dropped" arrest charge from three years prior-that 5 other nuclear plants had no problem with-Yet Progress found the need to deny me based on their critera that no one gets in with ANYTHING on their 5 year Backround  check.Now I am told that other utilities will honor the denial . So they  pretty much ended my nuclear carreer with no warning...just looking for any advice from anyone who had been through "access denial"-I actually feel Progress was looking for reason not to hire me-and just curious if anyone has made it in to one of their plants that did not have a perfectly clean 5 year backround check but did report it  and Progress energy did know about it.I am not looking for names-just for info.because I find it very hard to believe that every person granted unescourted access has a perfectly squeaky clean record- And I am seriously considerering  some sort of legal action .

[dosetek]

From what I have heard thru the grapevine, Progress is being a real bear with security clearances. But it is their decision if they want to give you clearance or not.  However I have heard of people getting denied access at one site and granted at another, I think it still comes down to that sites decison. I hope that holds true for you and good luck

[SloGlo]

jr... since yer currently in the appeal process, what does yer lawyer say to do about this situation?

[greg700]

I was just hired by progress for an unlicensed operator position at their harris plant.

and I dont' know the details yet, but apparently something is causing a problem with my security check.

The only thing I can think of (I disclosed everything) was some experimentation with pot during college, and more than two years ago.

I have a clean record, and good credit.  Would this be a disqualifying factor?
I haven't smoked anything since my sophmore year, and have since graduated.

[Roll Tide]

Smoking pot in college, if admitted on the initial security questionnaire shouldn't be a problem. Usually the problems are difficulty in reaching your references.

Do a dry run by contacting your references on the phone numbers you provided. Make sure they all know that you are expecting them to receive a call, and that you want them to tell the truth about you.

(Did I ever mention the guy in my NLO class that couldn't get his clearance. It seems that by the time they got around to calling, his former ship put to sea with all of his references but one. Yes, the other one was his ex-wife! He ended up providing additional references.........)

[xnhase]

10 CFR Part 73

§ 73.57 Requirements for criminal history checks of individuals granted unescorted access to a nuclear power facility or access to Safeguards Information by power reactor licensees.

***

(c) Prohibitions. (1) A licensee may not base a final determination to deny an individual unescorted access to the nuclear power facility or access to Safeguards Information solely on the basis of information received from the FBI involving:

(i) An arrest more than 1 year old for which there is no information of the disposition of the case; or

(ii) An arrest that resulted in dismissal of the charge or an acquittal.

(2) A licensee may not use information received from a criminal history check obtained under this section in a manner that would infringe upon the rights of any individual under the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, nor shall the licensee use the information in any way which would discriminate among individuals on the basis of race, religion, national origin, sex, or age.

[Graphic]

Wish you good luck, but if they hold you out you will never find out why, generically yes but not specifically. Most PADS have "Terms" which they will not tell you. You may have a "lifetime ban". Bottom line if it is decided you are not going to be let in, it doesn't matter if you have one flag or a hundred.

Keep applying if a place has a severe need they may adjucicate your flag, or give you another one.

Once somebody says they will give you unescorted access the NRC requires they adjudicate the information that was negative.

This is some information I have been able to gain, I have more but I think you get the drift.

Ehh, this thread is really old and you are a little misinformed. People are definitely told why they are denied access. Whether it is because of criminal history or not listing something or whatever the case may be you are still told why you are banned and for how long. Lifetime bans aren't a daily occurrence. You can't just deny someone without giving them a reason. PADS isn't that in depth...a lot of times you have to call access from a certain site to even figure out why they were denied from that site because of the lack of information in PADS.

Once you have unescorted access anywhere you simply have to go back to your last access because the other information has already been adjudicated since you 'had access' at another plant. There would be no need to go back over that information once you have gained access.

Maybe I'm just confused on what you mean, I did work 84 hours last week   

[puma2645]

Over half a decade old, but good info.. isn't it great to be able to put in 84s.  Shorter outages , but more hours..if you're into that sort of thing. 

[fp1]

My access was unfavorably terminated for a duration of 12 months for trustworthy issues where It was claimed I failed to report an accident and that I lied on my resume.
 The 12 months ended February 14, 2015 and I have been offered a new position but the plant that hired me is awaiting to hear back from the plant that terminated my badge since this record shows in PADS that it was unfavorably terminated.
Please answer the following:
1.   What is the industry standard for terminating a badge unfavorably for such trust issue?
2.   Where is documented that the plant has to provide information that my badge was suspended for 12 months to the plant that hired me?
3.   The fitness for duty manager only told me verbally” that your badge is suspended for 12 months and you can apply for access at the end of that time”. The duration of my badge termination was not documented on my termination letter. If the manager tries to change his story regarding the duration of the badge suspension what recourse do I have?

[fp1]

Smoking pot in college, if admitted on the initial security questionnaire shouldn't be a problem. Usually the problems are difficulty in reaching your references.

Do a dry run by contacting your references on the phone numbers you provided. Make sure they all know that you are expecting them to receive a call, and that you want them to tell the truth about you.

(Did I ever mention the guy in my NLO class that couldn't get his clearance. It seems that by the time they got around to calling, his former ship put to sea with all of his references but one. Yes, the other one was his ex-wife! He ended up providing additional references.........)

[JessJen]

Maybe I'm just confused on what you mean, I did work 84 hours last week   

Would you like to self declare?