I’m currently undergoing a security clearance investigation and have a question about a situation involving Guideline H (Drug Involvement and Substance Misuse) and potentially Guideline E (Personal Conduct).
On my SF-86, I disclosed taking a prescription drug that a family member gave me from their own prescription between approximately May and September 2022 for flight anxiety. During my subject interview, the investigator asked how many times I had taken it, and I estimated approximately three occasions based on what I remembered at the time.
After the interview, I continued thinking about the conversation and remembered an additional occasion when I took it on my wedding day in September 2023. This brought the total to approximately four occasions between 2022 and 2023. I wanted to correct my earlier answer, so I called my investigator and left a voicemail explaining that I had remembered another occasion.
Two days later, she called me back regarding contact information for a family member whom she intended to speak with as part of the investigation. I provided the information but forgot to ask whether she had received my earlier voicemail. I have no recording or transcript of the voicemail, only my phone history showing that I called her. I don’t know whether she received it or documented the additional information in her report. I’m now approaching my polygraph and am worried about how to handle this if the additional occasion comes up. If I explain that I attempted to notify my investigator but her report doesn’t specifically mention the voicemail or correction, could that create an apparent inconsistency or make it look like I’m retroactively claiming to have disclosed something?
I want to emphasize that I didn’t intentionally withhold the additional occasion; I genuinely remembered it after the interview and attempted to correct my earlier recollection. I’m interested in how this might be evaluated under Guidelines H and E, particularly the distinction between an honest subsequent recollection and deliberate falsification. Has anyone experienced something similar, or does anyone have insight into how investigators and adjudicators generally view this type of situation?