Filled out and submitted the SF-86 a couple of years ago for TS/SCI/FS Poly (IC). Fast forward and I completed my onsite processing: security interview, psych, and poly. During the security interview, I was asked a direct question which was related to another question asked on the SF-86. I answer the question in full with relevant details. I get to the poly and the examiner made it seem like I intentionally concealed information and was implying that I falsified my SF-86. I explained it was not my intent if it appeared that way, but was due to how the question was worded and how I interpreted it. I also emphasized that I completely offered this information once directly asked during the security interview, since the wording was such that there was no ambiguity. Proceed to the testing and I pass both sections of the poly, even the question asking if I intentionally falsified my SF-86. However, I’m worried now because the examiner made me think that maybe the SF-86 question was directly asking for this information, whereas I interpreted it in a different way. How will this look in adjudication (addition of information)? I have heard of applicants being denied for admitting to things like additional drug use that was not stated on the SF-86. Did I screw myself?
Well, you got through the poly so that is a big plus. I think that if the omission/misunderstanding/whatever on your original SF-86 had been truly problematic, the investigator would have dug into it more aggressively and you would have already gone through additional follow-up.
Its the job of the polygraph tech to latch onto anything they can and try to elicit more information. In the room, you might have gotten the feeling you were doomed, but that happens to a lot of people. If you passed the poly, I wouldn’t worry too much.