ISCR Case 09-04040.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 09-04040.h1

deniedJul 20, 2010· Hon. Noreen A. Lynch· hearing

Summary

A 41-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline H (Drug Involvement). The applicant's history included illegal drug use and the falsification of security clearance applications. Specifically, the applicant admitted to using marijuana from approximately 1992-1995 and again from 2001 until 2008, and Ecstasy from 2001 until at least the summer of 2006.

The Statement of Reasons alleged deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification of relevant facts on personnel security questionnaires and similar forms, as well as deliberately providing false or misleading information to officials. Disqualifying conditions were raised under paragraphs 25(a), 25(c), 25(g), 16(a), and 16(b) of the Adjudicative Guidelines.

While mitigating conditions under paragraphs 26(a), 26(b), 17(a), and 17(c) were considered, the judge found that the applicant's admitted illegal drug use and deliberate falsification of information on security clearance applications demonstrated a lack of candor and judgment. The applicant's continued association with drug-using friends and insufficient evidence of rehabilitation further contributed to doubts about his current reliability and trustworthiness, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to using illegal drugs, including marijuana and Ecstasy, over several years, which raised questions about his reliability and trustworthiness.
The applicant deliberately falsified information on his security clearance applications regarding his drug use, demonstrating a lack of candor and judgment.
The applicant's continued association with drug-using friends and lack of evidence of rehabilitation contributed to doubts about his current reliability.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)raisedAny Drug Abuse
AG ¶ 25(c)raisedIllegal Drug Possession
AG ¶ 25(g)raisedIllegal Drug Use After Being Granted a Security Clearance
AG ¶ 16(a)raisedDeliberate Omission or Falsification
AG ¶ 16(b)raisedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26(a)rejectedBehavior Happened so Long Ago or Was InfrequentThe applicant's drug use was recent and occurred while applying for a security clearance.
AG ¶ 26(b)appliedDemonstrated Intent Not to Abuse Drugs in the FutureThe applicant signed a statement of intent to refrain from drug use, but it did not fully mitigate concerns.
AG ¶ 17(a)appliedPrompt, Good-faith Efforts to Correct OmissionsThe applicant revealed his drug use in 2009 but delayed correcting his earlier applications.
AG ¶ 17(c)rejectedMinor Offense or Unlikely to RecurThe applicant's omissions were too recent and serious to be considered minor.

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to classified information will be resolved in favor of national security.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 23, 2009
Answer filed—
Hearing heldJun 22, 2010
Decision dateJul 20, 2010

Cite For

Disqualifying Conditions Related to Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Disqualifying Conditions Related to Personal Conduct Under Guideline E
The Importance of Candor and Truthfulness 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.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
1.a	Deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification of relevant facts from any personnel security questionnaire, personal history statement, or similar form used to conduct investigations, determine employment qualifications, award benefits or status, determine security eligibility or trustworthiness, or award fiduciary responsibilities.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	Claimed Other
1.b	Deliberately providing false or misleading information concerning relevant facts to an employer, investigator, security official, competent medical authority, or other official government representative.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Denied with Explanation	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	Claimed Other
1.c–1.e	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (2 against, 1 for the applicant). (low confidence)	Mixed		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

1.a

Deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification of relevant facts from any personnel security questionnaire, personal history statement, or similar form used to conduct investigations, determine employment qualifications, award benefits or status, determine security eligibility or trustworthiness, or award fiduciary responsibilities.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Drug Involvement

Admitted

(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form

—

Claimed

Other

1.b

Deliberately providing false or misleading information concerning relevant facts to an employer, investigator, security official, competent medical authority, or other official government representative.

Against Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE

Drug Involvement

Denied with Explanation

(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official

—

Claimed

Other

1.c–1.e

3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (2 against, 1 for the applicant). (low confidence)

Mixed

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
2.a	The applicant used marijuana, in varying amounts and frequency, from about 1992-1995 and from 2001 until 2008.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (g) expressed intent to continue, or failure to commit to discontinue	—	—
2.b	The applicant admitted using Ecstasy, with varying frequency from 2001 until at least the summer of 2006.	Against Applicant	MDMAWHILE CLEARED	Frequent	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (g) expressed intent to continue, or failure to commit to discontinue	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

2.a

The applicant used marijuana, in varying amounts and frequency, from about 1992-1995 and from 2001 until 2008.

Against Applicant

MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED

Regular

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(g) expressed intent to continue, or failure to commit to discontinue

—

2.b

The applicant admitted using Ecstasy, with varying frequency from 2001 until at least the summer of 2006.

Against Applicant

MDMAWHILE CLEARED

Frequent

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(g) expressed intent to continue, or failure to commit to discontinue

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION