CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 22-01548 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 22-01548

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

Case Profile
Decision Date3/21/2024
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Related decisionSee the appeal decision (Case 22-01548) →
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Carol G. Ricciardello
Government Counsel: John C. Lynch
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 40-year-old individual employed by a federal contractor since September 2021. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guideline J (criminal conduct), Guideline E (personal conduct), and Guideline F (financial considerations). The core allegations included a history of criminal offenses, including larceny, assault, and multiple traffic violations, as well as failure to disclose a job termination due to absenteeism on official documents.
The applicant admitted to several allegations but denied others, claiming misunderstandings regarding his job termination and the nature of his past conduct. He acknowledged some criminal charges and debts but expressed a lack of financial resources to address his delinquent debts, which totaled approximately $28,719. The applicant provided some evidence of debt resolution but also indicated that he had incurred additional debts since receiving the SOR.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that he failed to mitigate the security concerns raised. The judge found the applicant's explanations for his criminal conduct and personal conduct allegations not credible, particularly regarding his failure to disclose his job termination. The judge also noted the applicant's ongoing financial issues and lack of a clear plan to resolve his debts, leading to the denial of his eligibility for access to classified information.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · Against Applicant
- Guideline JCriminal 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. 22-01548

deniedMar 21, 2024· Hon. Carol G. Ricciardello· hearing

Summary

A 40-year-old federal contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline J (Criminal Conduct), Guideline E (Personal Conduct), and Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The denial stemmed from a long history of criminal behavior, a lack of candor in disclosures, and insufficient evidence of financial rehabilitation.

Specifically, the applicant had an extensive criminal record, including charges for theft, assault, and multiple traffic violations, such as operating a vehicle without insurance and driving with a canceled/revoked/suspended tag. The applicant also intentionally failed to disclose a prior employment termination on both a November 2018 SCA and a September 2018 Optional Form 306.

Furthermore, the applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient rehabilitation or good faith efforts to resolve significant delinquent debts, though one debt of $138 was resolved in August 2023 after receipt of the Statement of Reasons. The judge concluded that the applicant's criminal history, lack of candor, and unresolved financial issues raised serious doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant has a long history of criminal conduct, including theft, assault, and multiple traffic violations.
The applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient rehabilitation or good faith efforts to resolve financial issues, including significant delinquent debts.
The applicant intentionally omitted relevant employment termination information on security clearance applications, indicating a lack of candor.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 31(a)raisedPattern of Minor Offenses
AG ¶ 31(b)raisedEvidence of Criminal Conduct
AG ¶ 16(a)raisedDeliberate Omission or Falsification
AG ¶ 16(c)raisedCredible Adverse Information
AG ¶ 16(d)raisedCredible Adverse Information Not Covered by Other Guidelines
AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)raisedHistory of Not Meeting Financial Obligations

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 issuedDec 12, 2022
Answer filedFeb 7, 2023
Hearing heldFeb 8, 2024
Decision dateMar 21, 2024

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Extensive Criminal History Under Guideline J
Lack of Candor in Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
Failure to Mitigate Financial Issues Under Guideline F

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 that the applicant intentionally failed to disclose his termination from employment on his November 2018 SCA and September 2018 Optional Form 306. The applicant's personal conduct concerns were not mitigated, leading to a denial of eligibility for access to classified information.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant intentionally failed to disclose he was terminated from employment on his November 2018 SCA and September 2018 Optional Form 306.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Employment History	Denied	—	—	Claimed Acknowledgment and Remorse

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 F · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant had resolved one debt but ruled against him on other financial considerations under Guideline F. The overall financial concerns were not mitigated, leading to a denial of the application for clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant resolved the debt in SOR 1.a ($138) in August 2023, after receipt of the SOR. $138	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	—	—	—
3.b–3.g	6 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (5 against, 1 for the applicant).	Mixed			—	—	—

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on the allegations related to criminal conduct under Guideline J. The applicant was charged with operating a vehicle without insurance, a misdemeanor, and other related offenses, which were not sufficiently mitigated to overcome the security concerns raised.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant was charged with operating a vehicle without insurance, a misdemeanor, canceled/revoked/suspended certificate/tag, a misdemeanor, and failure to maintain lane control.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Charged Not Convicted	Admitted	—	—	—

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

Full decision

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