Summary
A 28-year-old apprentice draftsman was denied a security clearance under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct) and J (Criminal Conduct) due to a history of criminal behavior and falsification of his security clearance application. The Statement of Reasons (SOR) detailed multiple criminal charges and arrests, including burglary in 1999, DUI in 2001, and charges of making a false police report and assault. Additionally, the applicant was arrested for assault in February 2002 and faced two warrants for failure to appear on assault and false police report charges. In 2003, he was charged with assault and disorderly conduct.
The SOR specifically alleged that the applicant deliberately omitted these arrests and charges from his SF 86 security clearance application. The judge found that the applicant's pattern of dishonesty, including these significant omissions, raised serious concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.
Despite the application of several mitigating conditions, the clearance was denied. The denial was based on the applicant's history of criminal conduct, his intentional omission of significant criminal history from his SF 86, and the implausible and contradictory explanations he provided for these omissions.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant had a history of criminal conduct, including burglary, DUI, and domestic violence incidents.
- The applicant intentionally omitted significant criminal history from his SF 86, demonstrating a lack of candor and honesty.
- The applicant's explanations for the omissions were found to be implausible and contradictory.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 31(a)raisedCriminal Conduct
- AG ¶ 31(c)raisedAdmission of Criminal Conduct
- AG ¶ 16(a)raisedDeliberate Omission or Falsification
- AG ¶ 32(a)appliedTime Elapsed Since Criminal BehaviorThe applicant's criminal conduct began nine years ago and ended more than five years ago.
- AG ¶ 32(d)appliedEvidence of Successful RehabilitationThe applicant has gained respect in his current job and has not engaged in criminal behavior since.
- AG ¶ 17(a)rejectedPrompt Efforts to Correct OmissionsThe applicant made no effort to correct the omissions until confronted with the facts.
- AG ¶ 17(c)rejectedMinor Offense or Unique CircumstancesThe falsification of the SF 86 is a felony and part of a pattern of dishonesty.
- AG ¶ 17(d)rejectedAcknowledgment of Behavior and CounselingThe applicant's pattern of dishonesty undermines the likelihood of recurrence.
- AG ¶ 17(e)rejectedPositive Steps to Reduce VulnerabilityThe applicant has not disclosed his criminal record to supervisors or coworkers.
Key Rule Quoted
“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the revised adjudicative guidelines (AG).”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedOct 17, 2007
- Answer filedNov 5, 2007Applicant requested a decision on the record without a hearing.
- Hearing heldFeb 28, 2008
- Decision dateMar 7, 2008
Cite For
- Denial Based on Pattern of Dishonesty in Security Clearance Applications
- Impact of Criminal History on Security Clearance Eligibility
- Importance of Candor in the Security Clearance Process