Hello so I got offered a contractor job that requires me to have base access so I need a CAC card. I have filled out the OF306 and done the e-qip back in July. My only issue was in 2015 I got arrested for a DUII. I got the option to do the diversion program so long story short my DUII was dismissed. About 3 weeks ago my FSO told me that HNC told her that I would of been signed off on if it were not for me omitting my arrest on the OF306, and they need an explanation to as why I omitted it. (This is also my first time going through this process) I have looked over the OF306 and no where on there does it mention “arrest”. The only this is question #9 about convictions, imprisoned, probation, and parole in which my answer was no since I never got convicted due to my DUII being dismissed. I figured they had my fingerprints so it would be linked to those. so its been about 3 weeks since I gave my explanation and I am wondering how much longer will I have to wait?
The arrest likely would have been included on your eqip submission, not your OF306. It depends on which eqip forms you filed out.
Is it also possible that outcome of your case isn’t quite what you think?
Thanks for the response. I double checked and it states that it was the omission on the of306. On the e-qip form I filled out there was nothing on arrest and etc. Also double check with my counties court to confirm it was dismissed.
The question asks if you were convicted, been on probation, etc… A diversion program means you had requirements to meet BEFORE the charge would be dismissed. That is the same thing as being on probation.
Everything I had read said that probation and a diversion program are not considered the same thing. But the issue was I didnt out my arrest on the of306
Read all you want, the fact remains the court imposed a set of conditions which if not met, would result in a conviction. From an adjudicative point of view this is a form of probation, diversion, etc…
From a common, general perspective, a diversion program is not probation, parole, or a conviction, and that argument should nullify an honesty issue. The common person should not know how adjudicators interpret questions. It would be pretty reasonable for you to omit this charge based on the language of the OF306.
That being said, this would have definitely met the terminology of the SF85 or SF86, so you would have needed to include it on there.
The point here is that one DUI 4 years ago is not an issue and would not disqualify someone from getting a clearance. Being up front with it prevents any appearance of a lack of candor which in itself is a more serious issue. As I and others have stated on this blog site many times, be honest and when in doubt, disclose any potentially adverse information.
Totally. The only thing worse than dishonesty/lack of candor is mishandling classified info. Get the info out there, it will help you long term in your career. If you’ve got a bunch of stuff and your honest about everything this could be seen as an oversight but if this is the only issue and your found to be witholding that would be far worse than having one minor issue from years ago.
The only two things I filled out was the e-qip which had nothing about this and then the of306
The eQip specifically asks about alcohol arrests.
The one I filled out did not otherwise I would have put it. Also the issue was I omitted it from the of306
It sounds like he only needed a T1 investigation which uses an SF85…the ONLY question derogatory in nature on an SF85 is “have you used illegal drugs in the last year”.
I’ll be honest with you, I work with contractor CAC’s, and T1 investigations daily. In your situation, question 9 CAN be confusing and I’ve seen many answer just like you have. Unfortunately, these are also judgement calls on the other side.
They wanted an explanation of omission so I told them how I saw question #9 on the 22nd of November. So hopefully with my answer and that I have no other problems I will get to hear back soon.
#9 on OF306 is pretty cut and dry. You answer either yes or no. If yes, you explain as the italics direct you to.
“During the last 7 years, have you been convicted, been imprisoned, been on probation, or been on parole? (Includes felonies, firearms or explosives violations, misdemeanors, and all other offenses.) If “YES,” use item 16 to provide the date, explanation of the violation, place of occurrence, and the name and address of the police department or court involved.”
Apparently it is not that cut and dry because my answer was “no” since when I got arrested my charges were dismissed so I was never convicted, been imprisoned, been on probation or parole. I’m not sure where else I would have added that I got arrested.
I just completed the process of getting my (Secret) clearance earlier this year. I too omitted from my SF-86 an arrest but no conviction in my early 20s over 30 years ago. When I had my interview it was brought up then and I explained the reason I left it off because I too was under the impression if there was no conviction it didnt happen. The investigator explained to me that if there is a record of anything conviction or not it still exists. Fortunately for me my explanation was enough and I was granted the clearance just a few months later…
Mine was a T1 investigation so I never filled out a SF-86. Also they said I had omitted it from the OF 306.
Going to be almost 3 months now since I had submitted my response and have heard nothing…the wait is driving me crazy!