To SF86 or Not to SF86

I have 20 years in with Charlie. Twice in the last year I have been able to crossover without submitting an SF86. Some security officers tell me " I don’t know what they are doing but I have to submit an SF86?"

Question: If you can crossover without an SF86, is the SF86 just for the contractor to assess and interviewee or does it get sent to clearance division? Who determines if you are “Unable to crossover due to adjudicated information”, the contract company or the customer?



Just my educated guess, but I can see some companies wanting to see a new SF 86 so that THEY can do their due diligence and be reasonably sure that you are not about to get your clearance pulled because of a few DUI and domestic abuse charges.

Not out of the question Ed. It can be used to somewhat “sweat” or “smoke out” an applicant if one feels they are not being honest. I spent the better part of an hour plus in a screening interview yesterday as I felt the applicant was holding back. Initially I got a no to drug use, then a one of MJ use, followed by a couple MJ use, by end of the interview I had a confession for cocaine and one time use of 6 Xanax, not her prescription. Plus an arrest in high school for possession of MJ. And I denied her. I would not submit her for 18 months to 2 years past the last admitted use date. She is only 19 but my client takes a dim view when you migrate past MJ.

If a clearance is just out of or close to being out of scope, my government client requests a fresh SF86. I call this the quick “no no no” check, meaning they want to see if they speak to any possible misbehavior. At times they ask for a crossover form, and a re-investigation form plus SF86. Meaning they will crossover, but immediately open a new investigation. If anything is outside their comfort zone, they will send for an initial. Or slow boat to China as I call it and a 6 t 8 month wait with the crossover being denied.