Suitability for low-risk

On the SF85 for a low-risk/non-sensitive position, if someone was to disclose drug use within the last year but over 6 months ago, is it appropriate to write a lengthy description, with details about mitigating factors? Or briefly describe the event and wait for someone to follow up? Since there is no investigator interview for low-risk I’m not sure if there would be any other chance to explain what happened. Thanks

You should always add an ABC explanation for any issue. A= accurate (just the facts), B= brief, don’t ramble - pretend you only have so many words and one chance to explain, C= clear, again - just the facts, no emotions. One two sentences for what happened, then the mitigating factors. The adjudicator sees the comments on the questionnaires.

You want to write so the information supports what you are saying, even if you later talk to an investigator.

The important thing is keep it ABC.


thanks for your reply @backgdinvestigator. curious to see how minor issues like these will be considered, as it seems that agencies have become more lenient over the years, especially non-IC. although some of the shift seems to be for clearance rather than suitability.

if anyone has any recent anecdotal evidence, please share!