- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by CTB
- Nov 14, 2014, 11:20 AMChris,
How did the individual become an example of why NOT to lie? Did he suffer other consequences besides being dropped from being considered for clearance?
Thanks
How did the individual become an example of why NOT to lie? Did he suffer other consequences besides being dropped from being considered for clearance?
Thanks
Posted by mike
- Dec 20, 2005, 10:22 PMWhat is the procedure for updating your SF-86? I recently enlisted in the millitary, and made a few mistakes filling my SF-86 out. What the ramifications for alerting the millitary to the errors?
Posted by Guest
- Jan 16, 2003, 09:53 AMI'm in the military and have a TS clearance and two other clearances. Out of about 30 people I started my training with, only one had to submit to a polygraph test (administered by the DIS/DSS). It was a direct result of information they had uncovered on the background investigation. I'm assuming he passed because he did get his TS. My advice is simple. Don't lie on your SF86/EPSQ (Very detailed security clearance application. Lots of stuff to fill out). There are good odds of them finding out that you lied and then you probably will be required to take a polygraph. You might be suprised about what the services will accept.
Posted by steincj
- Jan 02, 2003, 04:19 PMQuote from: ItsMeZac! on Dec 11, 2002, 05:40 AM
So what is the MOS (in the army) where you will "see" polygraphs? Please elaborate.
Zac,
Check this site:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/polygraph/dod-2000.html
for the year 2000 statistics on DoD use of the polygraph.
Notice the stats on the CI Scope usage (since criminal and exculpatory don't matter here). The CI breakdown for usage is listed:
(1) Special Access Programs 2,128
(2) DIA Critical Intelligence Positions 1,234
(3) TOP SECRET 0
(4) Examinations for Interim Access to Sensitive
Compartmented Information 0
Basically , it is the position, not the MOS, that determines whether you will need a clearance. Note that the Special Access Programs are a step above SCI access. TS and Interim SCI don't polygraph.
Hope this clears up the question.
Chris
Posted by ItsMeZac!
- Dec 12, 2002, 12:17 AMLying about an arrest...wow...That takes some stupidity.
-Zac
-Zac
Posted by steincj
- Dec 11, 2002, 02:05 PMSorry for the error, you are correct, it is 97E. Those individuals, along with 35E (HUMINT Officer) are the ones who use polygraphs as an interrogation tool. I have never met anyone in the Army who has undergone a polygraph as a routine matter of issuing clearances, foir both S and TS.
Again, if something major pops up during the background investigation which the applicant contests, DIS/DSS may chose to administer a apolygraph. In most cases, the case file is handles by a subcontractor security company (usually MANTECH). In a case which generates a security issue, it is then handed back to DIS/DSS, and they determine how to proceed with investigation.
Examples of when the polygraph has been brought in? Good question. My guess would only be for counter-intelligence issues. I had an applicant once who stated that he was never arrested on his application. He was looking to change MOS to one requiring a clearance. But after receiving his FBI file, I saw he was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon, and using a firearm with intent to maim or kill. He even had jail time. And what happened to him? He was respectfully dropped from consideration for a clearance. He also became a great example for me as why NOT to lie on your application.
Chris
Again, if something major pops up during the background investigation which the applicant contests, DIS/DSS may chose to administer a apolygraph. In most cases, the case file is handles by a subcontractor security company (usually MANTECH). In a case which generates a security issue, it is then handed back to DIS/DSS, and they determine how to proceed with investigation.
Examples of when the polygraph has been brought in? Good question. My guess would only be for counter-intelligence issues. I had an applicant once who stated that he was never arrested on his application. He was looking to change MOS to one requiring a clearance. But after receiving his FBI file, I saw he was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon, and using a firearm with intent to maim or kill. He even had jail time. And what happened to him? He was respectfully dropped from consideration for a clearance. He also became a great example for me as why NOT to lie on your application.
Chris
Posted by ItsMeZac!
- Dec 11, 2002, 05:40 AM"Again, don't worry about the drugs if they are a thing of the past, and don't worry about the polygraph. Unless you are a 96E, you won't see them."
What's a 96E? You're talking about the Army right? I know that there is a 97E... The Human Intelligence Collector...
So what is the MOS (in the army) where you will "see" polygraphs? Please elaborate.
Thanks for reading
-Zac
What's a 96E? You're talking about the Army right? I know that there is a 97E... The Human Intelligence Collector...
So what is the MOS (in the army) where you will "see" polygraphs? Please elaborate.
Thanks for reading
-Zac
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Dec 10, 2002, 07:00 AMZac82
Regarding your questions, see Chapter 8 (Use of the Polygraph in Security Clearance Investigations) of Security Clearances and National Security Information: Law and Procedures, which was written by Sheldon I. Cohen for the Defense Personnel Security Research Center. The entire document may be downloaded as a 17 mb scanned PDF file through the Defense Technical Information Center by searching under Accession Number ADA388100 at http://stinet.dtic.mil/str/tr4_fields.html.
Regarding your questions, see Chapter 8 (Use of the Polygraph in Security Clearance Investigations) of Security Clearances and National Security Information: Law and Procedures, which was written by Sheldon I. Cohen for the Defense Personnel Security Research Center. The entire document may be downloaded as a 17 mb scanned PDF file through the Defense Technical Information Center by searching under Accession Number ADA388100 at http://stinet.dtic.mil/str/tr4_fields.html.
Posted by Zac82
- Dec 09, 2002, 10:45 PM"An applicant for a military security clearance generally does not routinely undergo a polygraph examination. When adjudicately significant issue information is developed during the personnel security investigation and is unresolved, then you WILL be asked to undergo an examination."
What would constitute adjudicately significant issue information? What would be a few examples? Lying about international relations? Finances? Employment Records?
Also, how are these issues resolved during the investigation? If someone says something bad about the person being investigated, how can an investigator tell if that person is telling the truth? If he/she can't tell if it is the truth, do they just resort to using the polygraph? Basically, when does an investigator decide that the issue can only be resolved by using the polygraph test?
Thanks for reading.
-A curious 20 yr old.
What would constitute adjudicately significant issue information? What would be a few examples? Lying about international relations? Finances? Employment Records?
Also, how are these issues resolved during the investigation? If someone says something bad about the person being investigated, how can an investigator tell if that person is telling the truth? If he/she can't tell if it is the truth, do they just resort to using the polygraph? Basically, when does an investigator decide that the issue can only be resolved by using the polygraph test?
Thanks for reading.
-A curious 20 yr old.
Posted by Anonymous2
- Dec 09, 2002, 02:33 AMGuest,
With matters like the David Tenenbaum polygraph fiasco, http://www.antipolygraph.org/litigation/tenenbaum/second-amended-complaint.shtml, you're right--there's no need for DIS/DSS to shoulder anybody else's blunders. In the polygraph world there's plenty of error to go around...
With matters like the David Tenenbaum polygraph fiasco, http://www.antipolygraph.org/litigation/tenenbaum/second-amended-complaint.shtml, you're right--there's no need for DIS/DSS to shoulder anybody else's blunders. In the polygraph world there's plenty of error to go around...
Posted by guest
- Dec 09, 2002, 01:51 AMHey stupid, it wasn't DIS/DSS who did her examination. Check your facts before you go off half cocked! How very much like you fools! 
Posted by Anonymous
- Dec 08, 2002, 06:39 PMDave,
No doubt DIS/DSS has and does resolve many issues with a polygraph exam. Presumably the Ana Montes polygraph debacle is an example of this sort of resolution--just not a very successful one--perhaps even accurately described as a disastrous resolution, yes?
No doubt DIS/DSS has and does resolve many issues with a polygraph exam. Presumably the Ana Montes polygraph debacle is an example of this sort of resolution--just not a very successful one--perhaps even accurately described as a disastrous resolution, yes?
Posted by Dave
- Dec 08, 2002, 03:21 AM"The longer check extends the time to get the final clearance - expect at least a year. YOU WILL NOT BE POLYGRAPHED!!!! The Army hardly ever uses the damned thing."
Chris,
Your post is accurate with exception to the above portion. An applicant for a military security clearance generally does not routinely undergo a polygraph examination. When adjudicately significant issue information is developed during the personnel security investigation and is unresolved, then you WILL be asked to undergo an examination. The Army doesn't administer it, but the Defense Security Service (DSS), formerly Defense Investigative Service (DIS) does. It is a specific issue examination. Of course, one has the right to decline the examination. The DSS resolves a very large percentage of the unresolved issues with the use of the polygraph.
Chris,
Your post is accurate with exception to the above portion. An applicant for a military security clearance generally does not routinely undergo a polygraph examination. When adjudicately significant issue information is developed during the personnel security investigation and is unresolved, then you WILL be asked to undergo an examination. The Army doesn't administer it, but the Defense Security Service (DSS), formerly Defense Investigative Service (DIS) does. It is a specific issue examination. Of course, one has the right to decline the examination. The DSS resolves a very large percentage of the unresolved issues with the use of the polygraph.
Posted by steincj (Guest)
- Dec 07, 2002, 10:21 PMMartin,
I am a former Army Military Intelligence Officer. Part of my duties was processing clearances (S and TS) for soldiers in my unit.
Smoking pot once or twice in the past will not bounce you from getting a secret. Dealing pot will, though, and possibly buying. But the drug issue is mostly focused on current issues, so if it was a one time in the past usage, tell them about it and don't let it bother you.
For a Secret, you will only deal with the SF86 or its newer version, the EPSQ. After the forms are processed, a NAC will be generated (National Agency Check) to see if you have a criminal record. If you are clean of major violations, a minimal background check will be performed to verify what you have entered on your forms. Expect the process to last 6-months to a year. If your MOS requires it, your duty post can issue an INTERIM SECRET clearance after a favorable NAC.
For a TS, you will again deal with the SF86 or EPSQ. This time though, the background check will be much more intense, checking not only what info you gave, but whatever is gathered from the field. The longer check extends the time to get the final clearance - expect at least a year. YOU WILL NOT BE POLYGRAPHED!!!! The Army hardly ever uses the damned thing. You can also get an INTERIM TS from your duty post, but don't bother to request one. Your duty post can't give you INTERIM SCI access, which means you can't be read on, rendering a TS virtually worthless.
Again, don't worry about the drugs if they are a thing of the past, and don't worry about the polygraph. Unless you are a 96E, you won't see them.
Hope all this helps.
Chris
I am a former Army Military Intelligence Officer. Part of my duties was processing clearances (S and TS) for soldiers in my unit.
Smoking pot once or twice in the past will not bounce you from getting a secret. Dealing pot will, though, and possibly buying. But the drug issue is mostly focused on current issues, so if it was a one time in the past usage, tell them about it and don't let it bother you.
For a Secret, you will only deal with the SF86 or its newer version, the EPSQ. After the forms are processed, a NAC will be generated (National Agency Check) to see if you have a criminal record. If you are clean of major violations, a minimal background check will be performed to verify what you have entered on your forms. Expect the process to last 6-months to a year. If your MOS requires it, your duty post can issue an INTERIM SECRET clearance after a favorable NAC.
For a TS, you will again deal with the SF86 or EPSQ. This time though, the background check will be much more intense, checking not only what info you gave, but whatever is gathered from the field. The longer check extends the time to get the final clearance - expect at least a year. YOU WILL NOT BE POLYGRAPHED!!!! The Army hardly ever uses the damned thing. You can also get an INTERIM TS from your duty post, but don't bother to request one. Your duty post can't give you INTERIM SCI access, which means you can't be read on, rendering a TS virtually worthless.
Again, don't worry about the drugs if they are a thing of the past, and don't worry about the polygraph. Unless you are a 96E, you won't see them.
Hope all this helps.
Chris
Posted by pfc coon
- Aug 09, 2002, 03:21 AMI am in the army and have a secret clearance.(mos 31u) They do not do polygraph test only background checks, if you are clean you can rest easy, if you do have some mess ups u r still probaly ok. Waivers can be signed for any misdeamenor