Security Clearance Defense • Statement of Reasons • Worldwide
How DCSA Releases Security Clearance Records (And Why It Matters for Your SOR Response)
When responding to a Statement of Reasons (SOR), clearance holders are often told they have already received the “pertinent documents.” In practice, many critical records are still pending—because DCSA releases clearance records through two different offices, each with separate authority and timelines. Understanding that split is essential to building a complete and accurate SOR response.
Why Getting Your Records Matters in an SOR Case
An SOR response is only as strong as the record behind it. Investigative reports, prior background investigations, and related materials often contain context, inconsistencies, or mitigation that never appears in the government’s summary. Without those records, clearance holders are forced to respond blindly—sometimes under tight deadlines.
Key point: Being told that documents are “pertinent” to the SOR does not necessarily mean all responsive records have been released.
The Two DCSA Offices That Release Records
One of the most common sources of confusion in SOR cases is that DCSA’s Freedom of Information and Privacy functions are divided between two offices, each responsible for different categories of records. Requests are often pending in one office while the other has already responded.
1. Adjudications & Vetting Services (AVS)
This office releases records that fall within the adjudicative file—the materials relied upon to issue the SOR. These are typically the documents listed on the SOR’s “pertinent documents” page.
- Adjudicative memoranda and determinations
- Administrative suspension or access actions
- Records specifically cited in the SOR
Once AVS processes and releases the records under its authority, it generally does not control investigative materials held elsewhere.
2. Investigations (FOIA / Privacy for Investigations)
This office has release authority over background investigation records, including prior investigations and reports that may pre-date the current adjudication.
- Single Scope Background Investigations (SSBI)
- Reinvestigations and reports of investigation
- Materials obtained from other government agencies
These requests frequently take longer because they may require coordination with other government agencies before release.
Why This Split Causes Problems in SOR Deadlines
In many cases, AVS completes its response and advises that all adjudicative records have been released, while the Investigations office is still processing a separate request for background investigation records. From the clearance holder’s perspective, it appears contradictory—but procedurally, both statements can be true.
This timing gap matters because:
- SOR response deadlines continue to run
- Extensions may require proof that records are still pending
- Key mitigation may be locked inside unreleased investigative files
Practical reality: You may need to show that a records request is still actively pending with the Investigations office even after AVS has closed its portion.
How This Affects Your SOR Strategy
Because SOR cases move quickly, clearance holders should treat records requests and SOR responses as parallel processes, not sequential ones.
Best practices include:
- Submitting Privacy Act / FOIA requests early—before the SOR arrives if possible
- Tracking which DCSA office controls which records
- Documenting pending requests when seeking extensions
- Framing SOR responses to preserve the ability to supplement once records arrive
Why Legal Guidance Matters
Responding to an SOR without the full record can permanently harm a clearance case. Knowing which DCSA office to press, how to document pending releases, and when to seek extensions often determines whether mitigation is properly considered.
Facing a Statement of Reasons or waiting on DCSA records? Strategic timing and record control matter.
Contact Korody Law for a confidential consultation regarding SOR responses and obtaining DCSA records.
Disclaimer: This article provides general information and is not legal advice for any specific matter.