liness of the application and duration of investigation when they put in the effort to prepare ahead of time with all the references necessary to answer questions accurately and completely. Additionally they can also gather references that may help the adjudicators understand whether or not any derogatory information can be overcome.
Any answers to the questions indicating a risk should be explained in as much detail as possible. Where there is doubt or question, the applicant should err on the side of over explaining instead of under explaining answers. Aside from artifacts explaining situations, the applicant may seek legal advice to assist in completing the document.
If an applicant is indeed concerned that past events may lead to the denial of a security clearance, they should provide as much information as possible explaining or demonstrating that the events are in the past, will not be repeated, completely overcome with rehabilitation, and successfully an non-issue as far as motivation to do it again, ability to be coerced or exploited, or a temptation to do again.
The adjudicators consider the following as they try to make a decision as to whether or not the applicant will be a national security risk. They make security clearance decisions based on interest to national security. Consequently, the applicant is required to demonstrate they are not a threat to national security and should provide artifacts demonstrating that though they may have been a risk to national security at one point, that risk has been mitigated.