Just curious if its better to self cancel and wait for the mitigation time to pass, or give it a shot for honesty.
The dilemma I have, is if I self cancel I may not get this opportunity again, and if I submit it and get suitability denial I’m gonna have to wait 1 year anyway again.
I would wait. I screened out a sharp young man just yesterday. Joined the Navy right out of high school, served 4 years, discharged honorably, no Captain’s Mast (Article 15 admin trouble). Tried MJ once just last month when he got out. Then he tried using his DoD clearance as he just separated to get another cleared job. For him the standard is even higher. Once you have a clearance and you fully understand the rules you are held to a higher standard. In his case I told him 12 months minimum, but recommend 15 to 18 months as he used when he had a clearance listed in JPASS. You are correct there is boiler plate information stating you can reapply in 12 months. That doesn’t mean you get a clearance in 12 months it means re-apply. This will become a bigger and bigger problem as states legalize and pot based products proliferate: potato chips, candy bars, suckers, chocolate, cannabis oil…etc.
As much as I am against it, I think that you are wrong about MJ usage getting worse with legalization. I suspect that the exact opposite is going to happen. Grass will be treated more and more like alcohol. It will only be an issue if it can be determined to be a “problem”.
You won’t wait a year…you will wait about three to four year…two-three years for the investigation to be complete, then you are denied, then you have to wait another year…
On a good note the delay in starting your investigation will give time for the drug issue to pass, but the adjudicators don’t always take that into account.
When I say bigger and bigger problem I mean until it gets treated like alcohol…which for the foreseeable future is a solid 10 to 15 years out if ever for the federal government to accept it. In the interim, for FSO’s, the standard will become ever more prevalent, with candidates then being more and more deceptive about its use, losing more and more in a polygraph if they go that route, before things change. We see the item pop up from time to time here where folks think it is okay as it was legal int eh state they visited. Doesn’t change the fed rules or fed results of revocation or denial. So this will rise in prominence before it gets any better.