CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-00534 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 23-00534

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

Case Profile
Decision Date9/27/2024
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Braden M. Murphy
Government Counsel: Alison P. O'Connell
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a former police officer who resigned in October 2019 during an internal investigation into his conduct, which included allegations of unsatisfactory performance and neglect of duty. The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) addressed security concerns under Guideline E, personal conduct, as outlined in the Statement of Reasons (SOR) issued on May 12, 2023. The core allegations included the applicant's failure to disclose his resignation and the circumstances surrounding it on his May 2022 security clearance application.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to some of the allegations but denied others, particularly regarding the nature of his reprimands and the ongoing investigation at the time of his resignation. He provided explanations for his actions, asserting that he left the police department to pursue other career opportunities and did not believe he was under investigation when he resigned. However, the administrative judge found that the applicant had not been fully candid about his employment history and did not provide sufficient evidence to mitigate the personal conduct concerns.
Ultimately, the administrative judge ruled against the applicant, denying his eligibility for access to classified information. The judge concluded that the applicant's lack of candor and the circumstances of his resignation raised significant doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness, which are critical factors in security clearance determinations.
Guidelines Evaluated
- 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. 23-00534

deniedSep 27, 2024· Hon. Braden M. Murphy· hearing

Summary

A 30-year-old former police officer was denied a security clearance under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) due to concerns about his candor and reliability regarding his employment history. The applicant resigned from his position during an internal investigation into multiple instances of misconduct, specifically citing neglect of duty and failure to turn in evidence.

During the security clearance application process, the applicant failed to disclose significant details about this resignation and the ongoing investigation. This omission was identified as a lack of candor, raising serious questions about his trustworthiness and reliability.

The administrative judge ultimately denied the security clearance application, concluding that the applicant's incomplete disclosures and the circumstances surrounding his departure from the police force demonstrated disqualifying conditions related to personal conduct.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant resigned during an ongoing internal investigation into his conduct, which included multiple instances of misconduct.
He failed to disclose significant details about his resignation and the investigation on his security clearance application.
The applicant's lack of candor and reliability raised serious concerns about his trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

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

Key Rule Quoted

“The clearly consistent standard indicates that security determinations should err, if they must, on the side of denials.”
— Department of Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 531 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMay 12, 2023
Answer filedMay 18, 2023
Hearing heldApr 17, 2024via video-teleconference
Decision dateSep 27, 2024

Cite For

Lack of Candor in Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
Impact of Prior Misconduct on Security Clearance Eligibility
Importance of Full Disclosure During Security Clearance Investigations

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

Full decision

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