CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-02417 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 23-02417

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

Case Profile
Decision Date7/25/2024
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Carol G. Ricciardello
Government Counsel: Jeff A. Nagel
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 31-year-old individual who had earned a bachelor's degree in 2015 and a master's degree in 2019. He had been employed by a federal contractor since June 2022. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guideline E, personal conduct, primarily alleging that the applicant had falsified his security clearance application by omitting the fact that he had been terminated from a previous job and providing misleading information during a government interview.
The applicant admitted to the allegations in the SOR, acknowledging that he had been placed on a performance improvement plan before his termination and that he had intentionally omitted this information from his security clearance application due to embarrassment. He also admitted to providing false information during his interview, claiming he left his previous job by mutual agreement. Despite these admissions, he did not provide any mitigating evidence or responses to the government's file of relevant material.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that he failed to mitigate the security concerns related to his personal conduct. The judge found that the applicant's deliberate omissions and falsifications raised significant questions about his reliability and trustworthiness, which are critical for access to classified information. The judge noted that the applicant did not demonstrate prompt efforts to correct his omissions or provide evidence of positive steps taken to address the issues that led to his untrustworthy behavior. Consequently, the applicant's eligibility for access to classified information was denied.
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. 23-02417

deniedJul 25, 2024· Hon. Carol G. Ricciardello· hearing

Summary

A 31-year-old applicant with bachelor's and master's degrees was denied a security clearance under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) due to admitted falsification of information on his April 2023 security clearance application (SCA) and during a July 2023 interview.

The Statement of Reasons detailed that the applicant falsely answered "no" on his SCA to questions regarding past employment terminations or departures due to misconduct or unsatisfactory performance. Specifically, he was fired from employment with BX for unspecified reasons but concealed this fact. During his interview with a government investigator, he further misrepresented his departure from BX as a "favorably mutual decision," later admitting he deliberately concealed his termination due to embarrassment.

The denial was based on the applicant's admissions of deliberately omitting his termination from his SCA and providing false information during his interview. The judge determined that the applicant failed to present sufficient mitigating evidence to address these significant concerns regarding his reliability and trustworthiness.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to deliberately omitting his termination from his security clearance application.
He also admitted to providing false information during his interview with a government investigator.
The applicant did not present any mitigating evidence to counter the government's claims.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG 16(a)raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts
AG 16(b)raisedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information

Key Rule Quoted

“Being truthful and honest is the cornerstone of the security clearance process.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 4, 2024
Answer filedMar 8, 2024Applicant elected to have the case decided on the written record.
Hearing heldJul 25, 2024
Decision dateJul 25, 2024

Cite For

Failure to Mitigate Personal Conduct Concerns Under Guideline E
Importance of Honesty in the Security Clearance Process
Impact of Admissions on Security Clearance Eligibility

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: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on allegations of falsification related to his security clearance application and interview. The applicant admitted to being fired from his job but attempted to downplay the circumstances surrounding his termination. The overall outcome was a denial of the security clearance due to concerns about personal conduct.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant falsified his April 2023 SCA by answering 'no' to questions about his employment and whether in the last seven years he had been fired from a job; quit after being told he would be fired; left by mutual agreement following allegations of charges of misconduct; or left by mutual agreement after notice of unsatisfactory performance.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Employment History	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant was fired from his employment with BX for unspecified reasons.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to Disclose	—	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant falsified material facts during his July 2023 personal subject interview with a government investigator when he told the investigator that he left his employment after a favorably mutual decision, when in fact he deliberately concealed that he had been fired by BX and he failed to disclose this information due to embarrassment.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Employment History	Admitted	—	—	—

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.