Summary
A 47-year-old network engineer, employed by a defense contractor, was denied a security clearance under Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The denial stemmed from the applicant's past involvement with pirated software and intentionally misleading statements made during a background investigation. Specifically, the applicant was alleged to have intentionally falsified their application.
Disqualifying conditions E2.b, E2.c, and E2.e were raised, while mitigating conditions E3.a, E3.b, E3.c, E3.d, and E3.e were applied. Despite the applicant's cooperation with the FBI and positive character references, the judge found that the applicant intentionally omitted critical information regarding his involvement with pirated software during the background investigation.
The judge deemed the applicant's explanations for these omissions not credible, indicating a lack of candor. This intentional omission and lack of candor created a vulnerability to exploitation and raised significant questions about the applicant's reliability and trustworthiness, ultimately leading to the denial of the security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant intentionally omitted information regarding his involvement with pirated software during his background investigation.
- The judge found the applicant's explanations for his omissions to be not credible, indicating a lack of candor.
- The applicant's actions created a vulnerability to exploitation and raised questions about his reliability and trustworthiness.
Conditions Referenced
- E2.bappliedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information
- E2.cappliedCredible Adverse Information in Several Adjudicative Issue Areas
- E2.eappliedPersonal Conduct That Creates a Vulnerability to Exploitation
- E3.arejectedPrompt, Good-faith Efforts to Correct the OmissionThe applicant did not make prompt efforts to correct the misleading information.
- E3.brejectedRefusal or Failure to Cooperate Caused by Legal AdviceThe applicant's omissions were found to be intentional and not due to legal advice.
- E3.crejectedMinor Offense or Unlikely to RecurThe applicant's conduct was not deemed minor due to the intentional misleading nature of his statements.
- E3.dnotedAcknowledgment of Behavior and Counseling
- E3.enotedPositive Steps to Reduce Vulnerability
Key Rule Quoted
“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for national security eligibility will be resolved in favor of the national security.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedNov 17, 2016
- Answer filedFeb 2, 2017
- Hearing heldSep 20, 2017
- Decision dateFeb 8, 2018
Cite For
- Lack of Candor Under Guideline E
- Intentional Omission of Critical Information
- Vulnerability to Exploitation Due to Past Conduct