Section 18 of the Standard Form 86 never gives you a number. It prints 16 relative types as checkboxes, sets one instruction above them and leaves the arithmetic to your family: “Select each type of relative applicable to you, regardless if they are living or deceased.” No published average, typical figure or cap on Section 18 entries exists that we could verify from a primary federal source. You walk 16 categories, and whatever falls out is your answer.

Why does the form refuse to give a number?

Because the count is an output, not an input. Nothing in the form states a minimum, a maximum or an expected figure.

One number circulates anyway. The paper SF-86 prints six relative entry slots, Entry #1 through Entry #6. Six is a property of the page, not a limit: the same instruction promises that “an opportunity will be provided to list multiple relatives for each type.”

The form is filed through NBIS eApp, which replaced e-QIP under a DCSA Federal Investigations Notice dated 17 April 2023; that notice is bot-walled, so we rely on a federal restatement of it. Section 18’s content is identical either way, as our e-QIP to eApp explainer sets out.

Which 16 relatives does Section 18 name?

Parents, stepparents, foster parents, children, stepchildren, siblings, step- and half-siblings, both parents-in-law, guardians. Anyone outside those 16 labels is not a Section 18 relative.

The list, exactly as question 18.2 recites it: Mother, Father, Stepmother, Stepfather, Foster parent, Child (including adopted/foster), Stepchild, Brother, Sister, Stepbrother, Stepsister, Half-brother, Half-sister, Father-in-law, Mother-in-law, Guardian. That parenthetical is load-bearing: adopted and foster children both go in the Child box.

Every entry starts with the same five data points, whatever the type and whether the person is living: relative type, full name with suffix, date of birth, place of birth (country marked “(Required)”), and country of citizenship, a field with two slots, so dual citizenship is captured.

The 16 do not all travel the same distance. All of them are eligible for 18.2, 18.4, 18.5 and the second branch of 18.3; only 12 reach 18.1 and the deceased branch of 18.3. The four left out, foster parent, father-in-law, mother-in-law and guardian, are full Section 18 relatives everywhere else and simply never get asked about other names used.

Do you list a relative who has died?

Yes. The instruction is explicit: select each applicable type “regardless if they are living or deceased.” A deceased relative gets the base block, then a skip gate routes them past most of Section 18.

That gate reads “Is your relative deceased? YES (If YES, proceed to 18.3) NO”, once in every printed entry, and answering YES jumps the address block. Questions 18.2, 18.4 and 18.5 each carry an explicit “and is not deceased” condition, so a deceased relative cannot reach them. Question 18.1 sits before the gate with no such condition, so it still applies to its 12 types. And 18.3 has two branches, the first written for the deceased.

So a deceased relative reaches exactly one sub-question beyond 18.1, and only as a foreign-born U.S. citizen of those 12 types. That last limit is our reading, not the form’s words: 18.3’s second branch, unlike 18.2, 18.4 and 18.5, carries no “and is not deceased” condition, so a deceased foreign-born guardian or parent-in-law arguably reaches it too. A deceased grandmother is out of scope either way.

What changes when a relative was born abroad?

The form gets longer, not harder. Foreign birth alone does not open 18.3: that block needs the relative deceased, or at a U.S. or APO/FPO address. A living, foreign-born U.S. citizen who lives abroad stops at 18.2. A relative who is not a U.S. citizen goes to 18.4 or 18.5, which add contact history and a foreign-affiliation question.

The common case sits on the wrong side of that gate. A parent who naturalised and then retired back to their birth country, or a U.S.-citizen child posted overseas, is foreign born and a U.S. citizen and still meets neither branch of 18.3, while 18.4 and 18.5 both begin “is not a U.S. Citizen.” Their entry ends at the address block.

When 18.3 does open, it prints four columns. Born Abroad to U.S. Parents: FS 240 or 545, DS 1350. Naturalized: Alien Registration on the Certificate of Naturalization (the USCIS, CIS or INS number), Permanent Resident Card (I-551), Certificate of Naturalization (N550 or N570). Derived: the same Alien Registration line off a Certificate of Citizenship, I-551, Certificate of Citizenship (N560 or N561). The fourth column is Other (Provide explanation), so the menu is not closed. The document number and issuing court go with it.

Questions 18.4 and 18.5 handle a living relative who is not a U.S. citizen, split by whether they live at a U.S. (18.4) or foreign address (18.5). Both ask first and last contact dates, methods and frequency of contact, and the employer. Only 18.4 adds the residence document question, a seven-option menu: I-551, I-94, I-20, I-766, U.S. Visa (red foil number), DS-2019 and Other.

Both contact menus end in an escape hatch. Methods: in person, telephone, electronic, written correspondence, Other (Provide explanation). Frequency: daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually, Other (Provide explanation), so an irregular pattern goes in Other rather than a box that overstates it. Both then ask whether the relative is affiliated with a foreign government, military, security, defense industry, foreign movement or intelligence service: YES, NO or I don’t know.

Derived from each sub-question’s stated conditions, on PDF pages 45 to 47 of the SF-86 (large PDF, OPM), the sheets the form numbers Page 42 to 44.

Who does Section 18 leave out?

Your spouse or partner, who belongs to Section 17. And your extended family, whom the form never names. That second exclusion carries a qualifier: absent from Section 18 does not mean absent from the form.

Spouses first, the most common mis-file. A current spouse, a civil union or domestic partner, someone you are separated from, a former spouse and a cohabitant all sit in Section 17, which ends “(If NO, proceed to Section 18)”. Your spouse’s parents, though, are Section 18 types.

A case-insensitive search of the full 136-page form returns zero matches for 14 terms: grandparent, grandmother, grandfather, grandchild, aunt, uncle, cousin, nephew, niece, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, godparent.

One qualifier travels with it. Section 19 asks whether you have had close and/or continuing contact with a foreign national within the last seven years “with whom you, or your spouse, or legally recognized civil union/domestic partner, or cohabitant are bound by affection, influence, common interests, and/or obligation”, and says in terms: “Include associates as well as relatives, not previously listed in Section 18.” A foreign-national grandmother, cousin or brother-in-law is not a Section 18 entry and may still be a Section 19 entry, and the bond need not be yours: it can run through your spouse, partner or cohabitant. The form’s definition is broader than people assume: “any person who is not a citizen or national of the U.S.” Citizen or national. Our piece on the close-and-continuing test works through that threshold; the SEAD 3 threshold covers the post-clearance obligation.

Does a foreign-born relative put your clearance at risk?

Not on its own. Guideline B of SEAD 4 gates contact with a foreign family member on whether it “creates a heightened risk”, and supplies mitigating conditions for the ordinary case. But that gate is one of nine disqualifying conditions, not the whole guideline. The concern is divided allegiance, not ancestry.

SEAD 4, effective 8 June 2017, is published as a scanned image whose OCR layer corrupts the very word this passage turns on, rendering “coercion” as “coerc10n”; the quotes below are transcribed from the page images. Paragraph 6 states the concern: foreign contacts “are a national security concern if they result in divided allegiance,” and may also be a concern where someone is “made vulnerable to pressure or coercion by any foreign interest.”

The condition people quote is paragraph 7(a), usually with its gate cut off. In full it covers “contact, regardless of method, with a foreign family member, business or professional associate, friend, or other person who is a citizen of or resident in a foreign country if that contact creates a heightened risk of foreign exploitation, inducement, manipulation, pressure, or coercion.” Strip the italicised clause and a contingent concern becomes an automatic bar, which is not what the directive says. Paragraph 7(c) cuts the other way: “failure to report or fully disclose, when required, association with a foreign person, group, government, or country.”

And 7(a) is one of nine. Paragraph 7 runs (a) to (i); only 7(a) turns on contact creating heightened risk. A foreign relative can also reach 7(b), connections creating “a potential conflict of interest”; 7(e), shared living quarters; 7(f), substantial foreign business, financial or property interests; and 7(h), foreign nationals acting to increase your vulnerability.

Paragraph 8 is the half that rarely gets printed; printing 7 without 8 misrepresents the guideline. It mitigates where the relationships and country involved make it “unlikely the individual will be placed in a position of having to choose” between foreign and U.S. interests; where someone has “such deep and longstanding relationships and loyalties in the United States” that a conflict resolves in favour of the U.S.; and where contact “is so casual and infrequent that there is little likelihood that it could create a risk for foreign influence or exploitation.” The frequency answer in 18.4 or 18.5 feeds that last test, and cuts both ways: casual, infrequent contact mitigates, while frequent contact is what 7(a)’s gate is built to catch. Neither document states what the field is for; reading it as the hinge is our inference.

Relatives’ citizenships are weighed, not counted; see how adjudicators weigh mitigation against a disqualifying fact. Where a foreign relationship does ground a denial, the mechanism is a Statement of Reasons.

What if you genuinely do not know the answer?

The form anticipates that. Section 18 offers “I don’t know” as a real answer option on the maiden-name item, the APO/FPO address, both employer items and the foreign-affiliation question, and the employer question hedges with “(if known)”.

The certification you sign is narrower than folklore suggests. You attest that your statements are “true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and are made in good faith,” and acknowledge that “a knowing and willful false statement on this form can be punished by fine or imprisonment or both (18 U.S.C. 1001).” Knowing and willful. But note where the escape is not: 18.2’s address block is five plain boxes, Street through Country, with no “I don’t know” (that option on the page belongs to the separate APO/FPO question). For an estranged half-brother whose address you cannot produce, the form’s own routes are the Continuation Space, which tells you to “continue answers” against the item number, and its instruction to “contact the office that provided you the form.” Whether a particular gap is a false statement is for that office or your security officer, not for us; none of this is legal advice. Same for a verifier you cannot remember or Section 23.

On consequences the form is plain, in its front matter: section 1001 “provides that knowingly falsifying or concealing a material fact is a felony which may result in fines and/or up to five (5) years imprisonment,” and agencies “generally fire, do not grant a security clearance, or disqualify individuals who have materially and deliberately falsified these forms.” An 8-year maximum also sits in 18 U.S.C. 1001, but on a different offense basis, terrorism or certain sex-offense chapters, not the SF-86 baseline.

One line deserves its exact verb. Federal agency records checks “may be conducted” on your spouse or partner, cohabitants and immediate family members. May, not will, and the form never says every listed relative is checked. It defines “Immediate Family” only inside Section 20B, prefaced “For this question,” and that list omits parents-in-law, foster parents and guardians.

Frequently Asked Questions

How many relatives do I need to put on the SF-86?

However many fall out of the 16 categories. The form sets no minimum, no maximum and no expected count, and we found no published federal figure. Work the 16 names against your family and list every match, living or deceased.

Do I list my spouse in Section 18?

No. Spouses, civil union and domestic partners, former spouses and cohabitants belong to Section 17, which ends “(If NO, proceed to Section 18)”. Your parents-in-law, however, are Section 18 types.

My grandmother lives overseas. Is she reportable?

Not in Section 18, which never names grandparents. She may well be reportable in Section 19: close and/or continuing contact with a foreign national over seven years, a bond that can run through you, your spouse, partner or cohabitant, and which expressly includes relatives not previously listed in Section 18.

Do I have to list a parent who died years ago?

Yes. Select each applicable type “regardless if they are living or deceased.” A deceased relative gets the base block, plus 18.1 if one of the 12 covered types, and 18.3 only if a foreign-born U.S. citizen.

My father naturalised and moved back abroad. Does 18.3 apply?

No. Both branches need more than foreign birth: branch one needs the relative deceased, branch two needs a U.S. or APO/FPO address. A living, foreign-born U.S. citizen abroad ends at 18.2, and 18.4 and 18.5 both begin “is not a U.S. Citizen.”

The practical takeaway

Before you open eApp, do the enumeration on paper. Write the 16 type names down the left of a page, put every matching person beside them including the dead, and mark each with four things: born where, citizen of where, alive or not, living where now. Those four decide every branch.

Keep that page. Under continuous vetting, your answers keep being re-checked for as long as you hold the clearance, and families move: people naturalise, emigrate, die. Whether a relative can also vouch for you is worked through in whether a relative can be an SF-86 verifier. For the authorities behind the form, see 5 CFR Part 732 and SEAD 4 itself, the ODNI directive, in the Energy Department’s copy.