Summary
A 38-year-old federal contractor with a prior security clearance was denied national security eligibility under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) due to a pattern of misconduct and a lack of candor. The Statement of Reasons detailed multiple arrests, including four public intoxication charges between 2000 and 2002, driving offenses in 2006, and a felony destruction of property charge in 2009. Further incidents included a 2012 arrest for driving while intoxicated and a 2013 reckless driving arrest.
Additionally, the applicant engaged in drug use while holding a security clearance, purchasing cocaine in 2010 and using marijuana multiple times in 2014. Crucially, the applicant failed to disclose the 2012 DUI arrest, the 2014 reckless driving arrest, and the 2014 marijuana use on his February 2016 Security Clearance Application.
The judge found that the applicant failed to mitigate these concerns. The denial was based on the applicant's history of arrests and drug use while cleared, his intentional failure to disclose relevant criminal history and drug use, and the inconsistency and lack of credibility in his explanations for these omissions.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant had a history of multiple arrests and drug use while holding a security clearance.
- The applicant intentionally failed to disclose relevant criminal history and drug use in his security clearance application.
- The applicant's explanations for omissions were inconsistent and lacked credibility.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 16(a)appliedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts
- AG ¶ 16(c)appliedCredible Adverse Information in Several Adjudicative Issue Areas
- AG ¶ 17(a)rejectedPrompt, Good-faith Efforts to Correct the OmissionThe applicant did not demonstrate a prompt or good-faith effort to correct his omissions before being confronted.
- AG ¶ 17(c)rejectedMinor Offense or Unlikely to RecurThe applicant's pattern of misconduct raises serious security concerns.
- AG ¶ 17(d)rejectedAcknowledgment of Behavior and CounselingThe timing of the counseling and the applicant's history of drug use did not establish persuasive mitigation.
Key Rule Quoted
“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the AG.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedAug 10, 2017
- Answer filedOct 9, 2017
- Hearing held—Decision made on the record without a hearing.
- Decision dateApr 3, 2019
Cite For
- Failure to Mitigate Personal Conduct Security Concerns Under Guideline E
- Lack of Candor and Credibility Issues in Security Clearance Applications
- Pattern of Misconduct Affecting National Security Eligibility