CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-00273 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 23-00273

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research — not advice or a prediction.

Case Profile
Decision Date12/19/2023
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Edward W. Loughran
Government Counsel: Nicholas T. Temple
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 38-year-old prospective employee of a defense contractor seeking a security clearance. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guideline E (personal conduct), primarily related to the applicant's failure to report foreign travel and foreign family connections, as well as allegations of providing false information on his security clearance application.
Key findings indicated that the applicant had a history of unreported foreign travel while employed by a defense contractor, which included trips to high-threat countries. He admitted to traveling abroad during a leave of absence and acknowledged that he did not report this travel, believing it was acceptable due to his work with the U.S. military. The applicant also provided inconsistent explanations regarding his foreign travel and failed to accurately report his employment history and marital status on his security clearance application, attributing these omissions to negligence and misunderstanding.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that he did not mitigate the personal conduct security concerns. The judge found the applicant's testimony lacking in credibility due to inconsistencies and unverified claims. The decision emphasized that the applicant's actions raised significant doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness, ultimately leading to the denial of his eligibility for access to classified information.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · For Applicant
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only — not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 23-00273

deniedDec 19, 2023· Hon. Edward W. Loughran· hearing

Summary

A 38-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) due to multiple instances of providing false information and failing to report critical details. The applicant was terminated from one employer in July 2021 for failing to cooperate with investigations and deliberately providing false information regarding foreign travel.

The administrative judge found the applicant's testimony not credible, determining that he intentionally falsified his 2022 SF 86. Specific falsifications included failing to report 2021 travel to Afghanistan, misrepresenting the reason for his termination from a previous employer as "work ended due to COVID-19," and omitting two periods of employment with another defense contractor in 2021. Additionally, the applicant intentionally falsified Section 13C of the SF 86, failed to report being issued a foreign passport in 2011, and falsely claimed to have earned associate degrees in both August and December 2012. He also failed to report a marriage that occurred between 2018 and 2020.

The denial was based on the applicant's termination for misconduct, the judge's finding that his testimony lacked credibility, and the intentional falsification of information on the SF 86, which demonstrated a lack of trustworthiness and reliability.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant was terminated for misconduct related to unreported foreign travel and providing false information.
The judge found the applicant's testimony not credible, accepting little of it as true without independent verification.
The applicant intentionally falsified information on the SF 86, demonstrating a lack of candor and questionable judgment.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 16(a)appliedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts
AG ¶ 16(b)appliedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information
AG ¶ 16(d)appliedCredible Adverse Information
AG ¶ 16(e)appliedPersonal Conduct Creating Vulnerability to Exploitation

Key Rule Quoted

“A person who seeks access to classified information enters into a fiduciary relationship with the Government predicated upon trust and confidence.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMar 22, 2023
Answer filedApr 11, 2023
Hearing heldOct 25, 2023
Decision dateDec 19, 2023

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Lack of Credibility and Trustworthiness
Impact of Falsification on Security Clearance Eligibility
Importance of Full Disclosure in Security Clearance Applications

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline E (Personal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found multiple instances of intentional falsification and failure to disclose information on the Applicant's SF 86, leading to a denial of the security clearance. The Applicant's explanations were deemed not credible, reflecting a lack of candor and questionable judgment.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant was terminated from [his] employment at [DC1] in about July 2021 for failure to cooperate with investigations and deliberately providing false information regarding [his] foreign travel.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	—	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official (d) pattern of dishonesty, rule violations, or other untrustworthy behavior (e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation	—	—
1.b	Applicant intentionally falsified the 2022 SF 86 when he failed to report the travel to Afghanistan in 2021 when he was working for DC2.	For Applicant	Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATE	Foreign Contacts or Interests	Denied	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant intentionally falsified the 2022 SF 86 when he falsely reported the reason for leaving his employment with DC1 as 'work ended due to COVID-19,' when in fact, he had been terminated from that job.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Employment History	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—
1.d	Applicant intentionally failed to report on the SF 86 his employment with DC2 in March 2021.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Employment History	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—
1.e	Applicant intentionally failed to report on the SF 86 his employment with DC2 in September 2021.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to Disclose	Employment History	Denied	—	—	—
1.f	Applicant intentionally falsified Section 13C of the SF 86.	For Applicant	Falsification Security Form	—	Denied	—	—	—
1.g	Applicant intentionally falsified the 2022 SF 86 when he failed to report that he had been issued a foreign passport in 2011.	For Applicant	Falsification Security Form	Foreign Contacts or Interests	Denied	—	—	—
1.h	Applicant intentionally falsified the 2022 SF 86 when he falsely reported that he had earned associate degrees from colleges in August 2012.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Education or Credentials	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—
1.i	Applicant intentionally falsified the 2022 SF 86 when he falsely reported that he had earned associate degrees from colleges in December 2012.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Education or Credentials	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—
1.j	Applicant intentionally failed to report his marriage from 2018 to 2020 on the 2022 SF 86.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	—	Denied	—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline E). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.