Unless you have some contributing cause (physical condition, mental issue, amnesia, etc…),
5 Likes
My recommendation to respond to the SOR, is to take each and every statement/issue that is listed and use the Mitigating Circumstances list (should have been provided to you with the SOR), and address each of the MCs to each of the items listed in the SOR. The more information the Adjudicators have, the better. For instance, if the situation was due to peer pressure, stupidity, immaturity, then own up to it! ‘Yes, I was pressured by my friends to drink alcohol…’. include the 5Ws & H - Who were you with, What was the situation, When was it, Where did it occur, How did the situation come about, How did you deal with it, Why did you do it, Why didn’t you walk away, etc.
Include your thoughts and feelings - for financial, ‘I went to a debt collector, but I felt like they were just after my money and after 2 months, I decided to not use that company anymore. I went to my Mom & Dad to ask for money, but they couldn’t help me.’ Tell the Adjudicator everything that you have done, felt, thought about concerning your debts. The MCs count.
1 Like
There’s a serious fundamental miscommunication issue here. Let me clear this up abruptly: I literally did not remember one of the underage consumption charges because after 11 years without having been convicted of that particular charge, I actually forgot about it since I was not convicted of it. I brought the other charges forward in the TESI except that one.
Oh, yes, I am being totally honest in telling you about my relief in not being asked about these charges in the ESI because they were considered city ordinance violations and not even misdemeanors, why incriminate myself if I don’t need to? Next, after having read so much on these blogs and clearance websites, I arrived at the conclusion that even if I lapsed on a question on my SF86, I would be able to clear it up with an investigator/Special Agent without issue.
Forgive my strong language when I say I don’t care in the least that you remember your issues from 35 years ago because I’m being honest, so, we ARE NOT comparing apples to oranges.
Regardless, thank you for your insight. I think your explicitness regarding my matter is what has helped me the most out of all of the advice I’ve received. Thank you for taking the time.
Hold on, let me add this: I am actually this clumsy, it isn’t a facade 
There is no miscommunication here at all, ciafan999.
3 Likes
Mr. Applicant,
skcubrats is 100% spot on with his assessment of your honesty and what you have shared on this blog. I don’t think I could add a heck of a lot more than what he already added. The most incriminating thing you said on this thread was “I can’t remember if he asked about it during the ESI…he might have, but, I think I remember being relieved he didn’t.” Unbelievable.
Here’s the problem. You have been less than honest and frank. You have lied to the Investigator even by your own admission on this thread. You keep bringing up multiple arrests and citations and you even minimize the seriousness of the offenses by saying that they were less than misdemeanors and only city ordinance violations. What don’t you understand about the question on the SF-86 that’s says “HAVE YOU EVER BEEN CHARGED WITH AN OFFENSE INVOLVING ALCOHOL OR DRUGS?”
It doesn’t matter if the charge was dismissed or expunged later on from your criminal history or if you were given a withheld judgment later on. The question doesn’t ask…”Have you ever been charged with an offense involving alcohol (exclude all offenses that were expunged from your criminal history record, were later dismissed after being origally charged, or because you were a juvenile you don’t need to list them).” Read the instructions and follow instructions. If you cannot follow instructions on a federal form what makes you think you could follow instructions or safefuard and protect information that is classified or sensitive from the federal government. I have very serious reservations about people like you and others being given a clearance and accessing info that is classified and sensitive or cannot follow basic instructions on a Security Questionnaire and then make excuses why you were denied a clearance when it is obvious you were less than candid, were dishonest during the interview, and have not mitigated your own issues. A security clearance isn’t a right of passage. It’s something that should be given to those that merit it through their honesty, integrity, good judgment, and overall fitness and suitability to access such information. I am not saying that every clearance holder has lived a perfect life but making no efforts to repay debts (no matter how small they are) and purposefully lying and feeling relieved you didn’t have to answer a question regarding your past is not honest or transparent regarding your past.
This is really very simple…I’ll end on this regarding how the appeals judges and adjudicators usually see this:
It is well-established law that no one has a right to a security clearance. As noted by the Supreme Court in Department of the Navy v. Egan, “the clearly consistent standard indicates that security clearance determinations should err, if they must, on the side of denials.” Under Egan, Executive Order 10865, and the Directive, any doubt about whether an applicant should be allowed access to classified information will be resolved in favor of protecting national security. In Egan, the Supreme Court stated that the burden of proof is less than a preponderance of evidence.
You might want to lawyer up.
5 Likes
I sincerely appreciate your explicit advice and thoroughness. I did mention the DUI (straightforward Misdemeanor) and I mentioned the assault as it was an EVER Felony question, as a matter of fact, at the TESI I was given credit for having “tried” to disclose the entire charge (underage drinking included), however, the adjudicator does not view it this way. Reiterating if I haven’t already, the underage drinking charge accompanying the Assault was dropped, so, to be extremely transparent with you, my friend, while sifting through my memory for convictions the aforementioned charge did not immediately occur to me to say (I was nervous also and as bungling as I am).
The other three underage drinking charges is where I initially missed the EVER alcohol and drugs question.
On this site I am being as explicit as possible, however, the reality is I actually did miss the EVER alcohol and drugs question as I was filling out the form. The reality is that those charges are incredibly dated and minor and wouldn’t hinder me from obtaining a clearance and I know this. I noticed the question on my copy of the application many weeks later and thought to myself “well, from what I’ve read, if we make mistakes on this SF86 then we’ll have a chance to disclose it with the Investigator/Special Agent.”… There’s a smidgen of ■■■■■■■■ in all of this, I know, but, it’s nothing which should hold me back since the oversight is a common one and for what anyone knows I never caught it first.
What does there a smidgen of ____________ mean?
Are you finally fessing up to your blatant dishonesty in the Bi process?
If I was your Investigator, you’d be up a creek without a paddle with your responses because of your lack of candor, integrity, and disregard for the seriousness of the process.
1 Like
CIAFAN…I concur with the above. Your attempt at justification comes across as quibbling. And it makes you look not worthy of trust. I am not saying you are not worthy, I am telling you how you come across is…not favorable. You can be forgetful. But claiming city misdemeanors or code violations…you sank your ship when you said you were relieved they did not come up. They see these charges. And they know you had opportunity to speak to them. And they know you did not. That…is the sin of omission. It does not paint you in a favorable light. You may still get cleared. But I would advise taking a different approach moving forward.
4 Likes
I need help!!! So I had a horrible and abusive supervisor and I got terminated for unfair reasons. The agent interviewed my former supervisor. On my SF86 I was completely honest and disclosed that I got terminated because me and the supervisor had an intense disagreement on a case report. She on the other had went overboard and stated that that incident I was untruthful and on top of that brought up my moms illegal status ( like how low can this lady go)
On the interview I also disclosed that I had a plagiarism incident on December 2016… Well on the letter in response to appeal they stated that their discovery was that the incident happened on December 2017 which was false because that was the date I attended counseling over that matter but the incident really happened on Dec 2016
I really feel like the special agents did a horrible job on documenting my info that misrepresented me now I have to drop money for a attorney and fight this I never had a felony misdemeanor nor drug abuse literally all he said she said type of ■■■■ that misrepresented me I literally cried over this till my eyes hurt.
Well . . . First, if you actually want help, you should start this as a new thread, not add it onto the end of someone else’s.
There’s some missing information here and that may be why no one else has responded.
Are we talking about a cleared position that you were terminated from? Or, is the recent SF-86 for an initial investigation?
It’s not unusual for an employee and supervisor to have wildly differing stories about a termination. If the supervisor believed, like you, that it was just “an intense disagreement” then you likely wouldn’t have been terminated in the first place. But, investigators and adjudicators are used to this type of thing and it isn’t the investigator’s job to determine who is right and who is wrong. They just gather information and report what they find.
Did you report your mother properly on your SF-86? If you did, no harm was done. If you didn’t, you already had an issue that was going to need to be addressed.
Plagiarism is another story but getting dates wrong is pretty common as well and can be easily corrected.
Why do you need a lawyer at this point? Did all of this information come with an SOR? What are the specific guidelines referenced in the SOR? If you have an SOR, I strongly suggest a lawyer because your attempt to write this up here clearly shows that you are not likely to do a great job writing a legal response for a judge to read.
Feed us some more information and we can likely help you some more.
Most likely yes, they can and will. In any case, the same issues are likely to come up in any new investigation.
BTW: It’s probably not going to get you much sympathy here when you say that you want to “beat” an SOR.
So . . . You DID ask this question is two places?
Yes . . . The SOR is a legal document and gives you rights to appeal. Yes, it’s all stored somewhere, why would they issue and keep a copy where they can locate it for future reference.
Yes.
Yes. That’s their opinion. But, they have reasons to believe that.
Actually, from what I remember of your story, it is a fact.
It is, I suspect at this point, the opinion of more than one person.
Did you appeal the SOR? If not, why not? Did anyone here or anywhere else tell you that you were blackballed?
Yes . . . It’s possible that you f’d up your response and that you will have to recover from that as well. You have been told, over and over, that this isn’t “one person’s opinion” but you seem to be stuck on that, while it would be much better for you if you let that part go.
Why do you think that the old SOR shouldn’t continue to follow you? You think that you should be able to keep applying to jobs until you get it right?
Try to move forward with one of the other jobs. That’s the only way that you’re going to find out what happens. You aren’t going to get an interim, your going to have to address the issues from your last SOR and you’re going to have to start moving forward.
What is it that you want from us here?
That is probably best. From here on, do and say exactly what your lawyer tells you to
Did you get an SOR or an LOI? The contractor community most certainly CAN appeal an SOR.
No, I have said over and over . . . This isn’t the opinion of ONE person at all. Everything gets reviewed at multiple levels. If you can’t get this one through your head, you’re simply not going to make it this industry.
But . . . that IS just the opinion of ONE person. Me. I’ve given you a long rope to tell your story and you seem to be stuck back at the beginning so I’m going to step away now.
How long before a secret clearance SF 85 investigation becomes out of scope?
Mine began in late 2015 and concluded in May 2017 (was put in LOJ status as I did not take the job).
24 months after you are out of access. And a Secret clearance is submitted on an SF86.
1 Like
What does that mean “out of access”?
24 months is two years. My secret concluded (LOJ status) in May 2017 but it was used to cost me a job Dec 2019. So that is beyond two years.