Security Clearance Decisions
Considering
the security clearance application process and the granting decision; let's
consider the following from the adjudicator's point of view.
Each of the following nine topics can be
applied to identify which mitigations would be appropriate for each of the 13
Adjudicative topics from foreign influence to computer usage.
For the sake of this writing, let's apply to
drug usage specifically. The reader can expand the application to whichever
adjudicative topic they need to cover.
the
frequency and recency of the conduct. Here is where the adjudicator views how
often the drug use occurred and when the last time drugs was used. If enough
time has passed since the last drug use (a year or more) the drug use risk
could be mitigated.
the
individual's age and maturity at the time of the conduct. This again points to
reasons behind the drug use.
If it occurred many years previously and while the
applicant was younger and the result of a few bad decisions while in school,
then it could be mitigated.
the extent
to which participation is voluntary. This extend could cover being a
participant during a group experiment to actually supplying drugs to the party
goers. The adjudicator will want to have a good understanding of the behavior
that led to drug usage contrasted with your current potential to reengage.
the presence
or absence of rehabilitation and other permanent behavioral changes. Completing
a rehabilitation program demonstrates a motivation toward positive change.
Voluntary rehabilitation and completion is a positive endeavor. Quitting
rehabilitation is going to be a concern.
If you
attended rehabilitation, you may want to explain the circumstances to include
counselors' notes, certificates, and letters of recommendation or other
artifacts that support or demonstrate a permanent change in attitude or
behavior.
the
motivation for the conduct. This is a direct request for information. The
adjudicator much understand the mental attitude behind the behavior. Was the
attitude cavalier, did it reflect entitlement, or was it a weak moment never to
be repeated.
The thought
is that past motivation could reoccur if not mitigated. An applicant could
provide statements from friends, co-workers, contemporaries or other
influential people supporting a character change. This will help the
adjudicator visualize a change in motivation or attitude.
the
potential for pressure, coercion, exploitation, or duress. If the applicant has
an attitude in favor of drug use, a feeling of entitlement to use drugs, or has
a drug positive ideal, this could be a huge factor. However, statement, letters
of recommendation, or completion of rehabilitation programs could prove to mitigate
this potential in the eyes of the adjudicator.
the
likelihood of continuation or recurrence. The adjudicator has to put all 8
points to the test. Once they consider the whole person concept, they've got to
rule in favor of national security on this one. If the likelihood of recurrence
or continuation exists, the clearance will be denied.
the nature,
extent, and seriousness of the conduct. The adjudicator would want to know what
type of drugs were being used, and the amount of drugs being used at each occurrence.
the
circumstances surrounding the conduct, to include knowledgeable participation.
This is where you can explain why you used drugs.
Was it a
one-time use after coercion from a peer group, or part of a religious practice?
Was it a bad decision based on a drunken event or just something you wanted to
do? The point is to paint a picture of the motivation behind the drug use so
that later you can explain whether or not the circumstances still apply.
Regarding
each of the 13 Adjudicative Criteria, the applicant should gather all
information available to explain the behavior that could cause a denial of a
security clearance.
The
information should be presented during follow up interviews or as requested for
review. Being well prepared will help with the adjudicative process and may
result in a favorable decision.
However, a lack of preparation may not fare so
well. Remember, the adjudicator makes decisions with the priority being on risk
to national security.
check also :How to make money through internet
Comments: 0
Post a Comment