CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 21-02189 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 21-02189

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

Case Profile
Decision Date2/28/2024
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Judge: Candace Le'i Garcia
Government Counsel: Sakeena Farhath
Applicant's Counsel: Matthew J. Thomas
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 57-year-old former U.S. military officer who sought a security clearance after being previously granted one during his military service. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons citing security concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline I (Psychological Conditions). The core allegations included a history of personal conduct issues, including physical altercations and a felony gun possession charge.
The applicant admitted to several allegations, including a 1995 simple assault charge and a 2015 incident involving firearm possession on educational property, which he claimed was unintentional. He also acknowledged a physical altercation with his then-spouse in 2017, for which he expressed remorse and took anger management classes. However, he denied other allegations, including threatening behavior during a 2002 incident in Bosnia and asserted that he did not intend to intimidate anyone. The applicant provided evidence of his efforts to seek help for psychological issues, including evaluations for PTSD, but did not receive a formal diagnosis.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that while he mitigated concerns related to psychological conditions, he failed to mitigate the personal conduct concerns. The judge noted the seriousness of the applicant's past behavior, including the physical altercations and the firearm-related charges, which raised doubts about his judgment and reliability. Consequently, the applicant's eligibility for access to classified information was denied.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- Guideline IPsychological Conditions · For 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. 21-02189

deniedFeb 28, 2024· Hon. Candace Le'i Garcia· hearing

Summary

A 57-year-old military veteran was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), despite successfully mitigating issues under Guideline I (Psychological Conditions). The applicant admitted to several incidents that raised doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness, leading to the denial.

Specific allegations included a 2017 physical altercation with his then-spouse that resulted in an orbital fracture, and a 2019 verbal altercation with the same spouse where he damaged a car. Additionally, in 2015, the applicant was arrested for felony gun possession on educational property and misdemeanor assault by pointing a gun. A 2002 incident in Bosnia involved a heated exchange with a help desk technician while disassembling a weapon, which was perceived as intimidation.

While a licensed psychologist concluded the applicant did not meet criteria for any diagnosable mental health conditions, the judge found that the applicant's history of violent behavior and legal issues demonstrated a lack of judgment. The applicant failed to show sufficient rehabilitation or changed circumstances regarding his personal conduct, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to multiple incidents of personal conduct that raised questions about his judgment and reliability.
The judge found that the applicant's history of violent behavior and legal issues cast doubt on his trustworthiness.
Despite mitigating psychological conditions, the applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient rehabilitation or changed circumstances regarding his personal conduct.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 16(c)appliedCredible Adverse Information in Several Adjudicative Issue Areas
AG ¶ 16(d)appliedCredible Adverse Information That Is Not Explicitly Covered Under Any Other Guideline

Mitigating

AG ¶ 29(c)appliedRecent Opinion by a Duly Qualified Mental Health Professional
AG ¶ 29(d)appliedPast Psychological/psychiatric Condition Was Temporary
AG ¶ 29(e)appliedNo Indication of a Current Problem

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 2, 2022
Answer filedAug 2, 2022
Hearing heldSep 7, 2023via video teleconference
Decision dateFeb 28, 2024

Cite For

Evaluation of Personal Conduct Issues Under Guideline E
Importance of Reliability and Trustworthiness in National Security Roles
Mitigating Psychological Conditions in Security Clearance Cases

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 against the applicant on all allegations under Guideline E, citing concerns about personal conduct including physical altercations and a history of violence. The applicant admitted to several allegations but did not successfully mitigate the concerns raised.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
1.a	In 2017, Applicant was in a physical altercation with his then spouse, causing her to suffer an orbital fracture.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Denied	—	—	—
1.b	In 2019, Applicant was in a verbal altercation with his then spouse, during which he broke and threw a car's antenna and kicked its tires.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	In 2015, Applicant was arrested for felony gun possession on educational property and misdemeanor assault by pointing a gun.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	Criminal Conduct	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	In 2002, while deployed to Bosnia, Applicant had a heated exchange with a help desk technician while disassembling his weapon, which could have been perceived as an intimidation tactic.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	—	—	—

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline I (Psychological Conditions) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant does not currently meet the criteria for any diagnosable mental health conditions, as evaluated by a licensed psychologist. Despite this finding, the overall eligibility for access to classified information was denied due to unresolved personal conduct issues.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶28)	Mitigating applied (¶29)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant was evaluated by a licensed psychologist who concluded he does not currently meet criteria for any diagnosable mental health conditions.	For Applicant	Unspecified Psychological Condition	Denied	—	—	—

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

Full decision

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