In the world of security clearance law, candor is everything. Adjudicators are often willing to mitigate past drug use, debt, or foreign ties, but they are rarely willing to overlook a deliberate false statement.

Guideline E: Personal Conduct and Integrity

Most denials related to "lying" fall under Adjudicative Guideline E (Personal Conduct). This guideline evaluates whether an applicant is honest, reliable, and trustworthy. A single intentional omission on your SF-86 (e-App) can be interpreted as a "lack of candor," creating a nearly insurmountable hurdle for your clearance.

The Criminal Risk: 18 U.S.C. § 1001

Beyond losing your job, falsifying a federal document is a crime. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, knowingly and willfully making a false statement to the federal government is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison. In cases involving national security or foreign governments, those penalties can increase significantly.

Mistakes vs. Omissions: How We Defend You

There is a vital legal distinction between an unintentional error and a willful deception. Adjudicators understand that the SF-86 is a complex document and that memories fade.

We help clients mitigate Guideline E concerns by:

Voluntary Disclosure: Correcting the record proactively before an investigator discovers the error.
Demonstrating Lack of Intent: Proving that the omission was due to confusion, a misunderstanding of the question, or faulty memory rather than an attempt to deceive.
The Whole Person Concept: Showing that the omission was an isolated incident in an otherwise exemplary life of service and honesty.


If you have questions or concerns about your security clearance, contact the Security Clearances Professionals, at securityclearancepro.com, asya@securityclearancepro.com, or call (904) 884-5891.