One of the most significant red flags in the adjudication process for a security clearance for potential employers and/or sponsors is a loss of jurisdiction. According to the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA), a loss of jurisdiction is a designation reflected in the Defense Information System for Security (DISS) that is placed on an individual’s eligibility for access to classified information when they have lost affiliation with the Department of Defense as a military member, federal employee, or employee with a cleared government contractor.

In laymen’s terms, if you lose sponsorship for your clearance whether through voluntarily or involuntary separation and there is a pending adjudication or investigation on your clearance, the Adjudication and Vetting Service (AVS) are no longer able to make an eligibility determination on your security clearance.

Loss of Jurisdiction

Typically, a loss of jurisdiction occurs when there is something that needs to be adjudicated and/or investigated, such as a pending Statement of Reasons, request for information, or an incident report placed in DISS, typically by a current or former employer, and a separation of sponsorship occurs before those issues can be adjudicated.  Since the loss of sponsorship indicates that you no longer require a security clearance, DCSA Adjudication and Vetting Service (DCSA AVS) would no longer have jurisdiction to make an eligibility determination on a person’s security clearance.

This essentially means that DCSA “lost jurisdiction” to make a determination on your clearance because you no longer have a need for a security clearance. Commonly called a “flag” or “red flag” in your DISS, this notifies potential employers of the unresolved nature of the potential security concerns. Employers have concerns about this, especially employers who have an immediate need to fill a position, as the flag notifies a potential employer that there could be delays in you obtaining security clearance eligibility. These “flags” can make it difficult to obtain employment in the future unless the loss of jurisdiction is resolved.

Resolving Loss of Jurisdiction

While a “flag” can occur for a plethora of reasons, there are very limited ways to resolve a “loss of jurisdiction.” The most common way to “resolve” a loss of jurisdiction is to obtain new sponsorship and for the security manager or facility security officer to submit a Customer Service Request (CSR) in DISS to request adjudication of a person’s security clearance eligibility. This request can only occur if the new company takes over sponsorship for your clearance and notifies DCSA of this sponsorship via DISS. Plainly put, once you obtain sponsorship for your security clearance, your new organization can notify DOD to continue or begin a new adjudication of your security clearance in an effort to resolve any outstanding issues.

Another way to “resolve” a loss of jurisdiction, which is much more complicated, is to file a Request to Amend you DISS records through sending this request directly to DISS in the event there is any false and/or derogatory information in your record.  You will still need to obtain sponsorship for your security clearance in order to actively use it, however, if successful, this would resolve any pending incident reports contained in your file and thus would make it significantly easier to obtain sponsorship by removing the “flag” in your DISS. This is a complicated way to resolve a loss of jurisdiction as DCSA will only remove an incident report in the event it can be proven through sufficient and uncontroverted evidence that the information contained in the incident report is false or incorrect. Without this solid evidence, the incident report will not be removed and the loss of jurisdiction will remain absent a new sponsor and successful adjudication.

The resolution of a loss of jurisdiction process can be elaborate, especially if you have not taken the necessary steps to mitigate the concerns that previously caused your clearance to be flagged. The inability to successfully resolve a loss of jurisdiction could have a negative impact on current or future employment.

Tully Rinckey attorneys understand that issues involving security clearances can be challenging, and they will handle your matter with the attention it deserves. If you have additional questions about resolving loss of jurisdiction matters, our team of attorneys is available to assist you today. Please call 8885294543

Ryan C. Nerney, Esq. is the Managing Partner of the Ladera Ranch office of Tully Rinckey PLLC, where he focuses his practice primarily on national security law and federal employment law matters. Ryan represents clients who have security clearance issues against agencies such as the CIA, NSA, DIA, DOD, NRO, and DOE, among others. He has represented numerous clients in security clearance revocation proceedings and has a proven record of saving clients’ jobs, as well as anticipating and resolving potential future issues with their security clearances. Ryan has also represented various clients in MSPB, EEO, Federal and State Court regarding various employment matters, including discrimination, retaliation, and USERRA violations. Ryan currently serves as Secretary for the National Security Lawyers Association (NSLA) and was awarded the 2022 Security Clearance Lawyer of the Year award by the NSLA. He has also been selected as a 2022, 2023,2024, and 2025 Rising Star from Superlawyers in Southern California.