ISCR Case 09-04986.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 09-04986.h1

deniedJun 14, 2010· Hon. Richard A. Cefola· hearing

Summary

A former U.S. Navy member was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption). The denial stemmed from multiple instances of falsification on his security clearance application and an OPM Affidavit, coupled with a history of alcohol-related offenses.

Specifically, the applicant falsely stated on his August 2008 e-QIP that he had never had a clearance denied, despite a denial in January 2005 by the Department of the Navy Central Adjudication Facility (DON CAF). He also falsely claimed in a June 2009 OPM Affidavit to have held a "Secret" clearance until his discharge. Furthermore, he failed to disclose multiple alcohol-related charges and convictions from 1998, 2001, and 2004, and a 2004 Captain's mast, despite questions on the e-QIP specifically inquiring about such incidents within the relevant timeframe.

The applicant's history included citations for open container violations in 1994 and 1996, DUI convictions in 1998 and 2001, and a drunk driving charge in 2004 that resulted in a Captain's mast. While some mitigating factors regarding his alcohol consumption were considered, the judge found that the applicant's repeated and recent dishonesty significantly outweighed these factors, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant engaged in willful falsification on his e-QIP and OPM Affidavit regarding prior security clearance denials and alcohol-related offenses.
The applicant had a history of multiple alcohol-related incidents, including DUIs, which raised questions about his judgment and reliability.
The applicant's recent and repeated falsifications were deemed significant enough to outweigh any mitigating factors.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A5raisedPersonal ConductThe applicant's willful falsifications on security forms.
G2.A1raisedAlcohol ConsumptionThe applicant's history of alcohol-related incidents.

Mitigating

G2.M1appliedAlcohol ConsumptionThe applicant's last alcohol-related incident occurred six years prior, and he has support from colleagues regarding his sobriety.

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 issuedSep 24, 2009
Answer filedNov 11, 2009
Hearing heldApr 1, 2010
Decision dateJun 14, 2010

Cite For

Willful Falsification of Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
Impact of Alcohol-related Incidents on Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline G
Consideration of the Whole-person Concept in Security Clearance Decisions.

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	In 2004, the Applicant was a member of the U.S. Navy. In June of 2004, the Department of the Navy Central Adjudication Facility (DON CAF) issued the Applicant a Letter of Intent (LOI) proposing to revoke his eligibility for access to classified information citing, in part, Personal Conduct and Alcohol Consumption. In August of 2004, the Applicant responded to DON CAF’s concerns in writing. However, he did not ask for a hearing; and as such, in January of 2005, the DON CAF denied his security clearance citing, in part, his Personal Conduct and Alcohol Consumption.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Personal Conduct	—	Unknown	—	—	—
1.b	The Applicant answered “No” in the question posited at Section 26.b. on his August 28, 2008 e-QIP. It asks the following: “To your knowledge, have you ever had a clearance or access authorization denied, suspended, or revoked . . . ?” As noted above, the Applicant was denied a security clearance in January of 2005; and as a such, the Applicant’s answer to Section 26.b. is a wilful falsification.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—
1.c	The Applicant executed a follow up Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Affidavit in June of 2009. He swore to the following: “I held a ‘Secret’ Clearance when I was in the Navy, until I was discharged on 3/15/06.” In fact, the Applicant was denied a security clearance in January of 2005; and as a such, the Applicant’s written statement is a wilful falsification.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—
1.d	The Applicant answered “No” in the question posited at Section 23.d. on his August 28, 2008 e-QIP. It asks the following: “Have you ever been charged with or convicted of any offense(s) related to alcohol or drugs?” In fact, the Applicant was charged with an alcohol related offense in 2004, and also convicted of alcohol related offenses in 2001 and 1998. The Applicant avers that he thought he “only had to go back 7 years.” Even if the Applicant is to be believed, he was charged with an alcohol related offense in 2004, only four years prior to him executing his August 28, 2008 e-QIP. Therefore, the Applicant’s answer, even by his own rendition, is a wilful falsification.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—
1.e	The Applicant answered “No” in the question posited at Section 23.e. on his August 28, 2008 e-QIP. It asks the following: “In the last 7 years, have you been subject to court martial, or other disciplinary proceedings under the Uniform Code of Military Justice? (Include non-judicial, Captain’s mast, etc.)” In fact, the Applicant received a Captain’s mast as a result of his alcohol related offense in 2004. The Applicant avers that he “was told this would not be a matter of public record.” The Applicant’s Answer is not believable. The question specifically includes a Captain’s mast in its inquiry; and as such, the Applicant’s answer is a wilful falsification.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	—	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

1.a

In 2004, the Applicant was a member of the U.S. Navy. In June of 2004, the Department of the Navy Central Adjudication Facility (DON CAF) issued the Applicant a Letter of Intent (LOI) proposing to revoke his eligibility for access to classified information citing, in part, Personal Conduct and Alcohol Consumption. In August of 2004, the Applicant responded to DON CAF’s concerns in writing. However, he did not ask for a hearing; and as such, in January of 2005, the DON CAF denied his security clearance citing, in part, his Personal Conduct and Alcohol Consumption.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Personal Conduct

—

Unknown

—

1.b

The Applicant answered “No” in the question posited at Section 26.b. on his August 28, 2008 e-QIP. It asks the following: “To your knowledge, have you ever had a clearance or access authorization denied, suspended, or revoked . . . ?” As noted above, the Applicant was denied a security clearance in January of 2005; and as a such, the Applicant’s answer to Section 26.b. is a wilful falsification.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

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

—

1.c

The Applicant executed a follow up Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Affidavit in June of 2009. He swore to the following: “I held a ‘Secret’ Clearance when I was in the Navy, until I was discharged on 3/15/06.” In fact, the Applicant was denied a security clearance in January of 2005; and as a such, the Applicant’s written statement is a wilful falsification.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

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

—

1.d

The Applicant answered “No” in the question posited at Section 23.d. on his August 28, 2008 e-QIP. It asks the following: “Have you ever been charged with or convicted of any offense(s) related to alcohol or drugs?” In fact, the Applicant was charged with an alcohol related offense in 2004, and also convicted of alcohol related offenses in 2001 and 1998. The Applicant avers that he thought he “only had to go back 7 years.” Even if the Applicant is to be believed, he was charged with an alcohol related offense in 2004, only four years prior to him executing his August 28, 2008 e-QIP. Therefore, the Applicant’s answer, even by his own rendition, is a wilful falsification.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

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

—

1.e

The Applicant answered “No” in the question posited at Section 23.e. on his August 28, 2008 e-QIP. It asks the following: “In the last 7 years, have you been subject to court martial, or other disciplinary proceedings under the Uniform Code of Military Justice? (Include non-judicial, Captain’s mast, etc.)” In fact, the Applicant received a Captain’s mast as a result of his alcohol related offense in 2004. The Applicant avers that he “was told this would not be a matter of public record.” The Applicant’s Answer is not believable. The question specifically includes a Captain’s mast in its inquiry; and as such, the Applicant’s answer is a wilful falsification.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

—

Denied

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

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
2.a	In March of 1994, the Applicant was cited for an Open Container/Drinking Alcohol in a Vehicle. (GX 7 at page 10.) He was fined as a result of this citation. (Id.)	For Applicant	Alcohol Related Arrest	Admitted	—	—	—
2.b	In March of 1996, the Applicant was cited, again, for an Open Container/Drinking Alcohol in a Vehicle. (GX 7 at page 10.) He was also fined as a result of this citation. (Id.)	For Applicant	Alcohol Related Arrest	Admitted	—	—	—
2.c	In April of 1998, the Applicant was charged with, and subsequently found guilty of, Driving Under the Influence (DUI). (GX 2 at page 4, and GX 7 at page 10.) He was sentenced to 60 days in jail, of which 58 days were suspended, fined, and placed on probation for 12 months. (Id.)	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	—	—	—
2.d	In August of 2001, the Applicant was again charged with, and subsequently found guilty of, DUI. (GX 2 at pages 4~5, GX 4 at page 4, and GX 7 at page 11.) He was sentenced to six months in jail, all of which was suspended, fined, ordered to obtain an alcohol assessment, and placed on probation for another 12 months. (Id.)	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	—	—	—
2.e	In May of 2004, the Applicant was charged with Drunk Driving. (GX 6, and GX 7 at page 7.) As a result of the Captain’s mast discussed above, he was reduced in rank one pay grade, forfeited pay, was restricted, and performed extra duty. (Id.)	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

2.a

In March of 1994, the Applicant was cited for an Open Container/Drinking Alcohol in a Vehicle. (GX 7 at page 10.) He was fined as a result of this citation. (Id.)

For Applicant

Alcohol Related Arrest

Admitted

—

2.b

In March of 1996, the Applicant was cited, again, for an Open Container/Drinking Alcohol in a Vehicle. (GX 7 at page 10.) He was also fined as a result of this citation. (Id.)

For Applicant

Alcohol Related Arrest

Admitted

—

2.c

In April of 1998, the Applicant was charged with, and subsequently found guilty of, Driving Under the Influence (DUI). (GX 2 at page 4, and GX 7 at page 10.) He was sentenced to 60 days in jail, of which 58 days were suspended, fined, and placed on probation for 12 months. (Id.)

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

—

2.d

In August of 2001, the Applicant was again charged with, and subsequently found guilty of, DUI. (GX 2 at pages 4~5, GX 4 at page 4, and GX 7 at page 11.) He was sentenced to six months in jail, all of which was suspended, fined, ordered to obtain an alcohol assessment, and placed on probation for another 12 months. (Id.)

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

—

2.e

In May of 2004, the Applicant was charged with Drunk Driving. (GX 6, and GX 7 at page 7.) As a result of the Captain’s mast discussed above, he was reduced in rank one pay grade, forfeited pay, was restricted, and performed extra duty. (Id.)

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

—

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