ISCR Case 06-22986.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 06-22986.h1

deniedSep 25, 2008· Hon. Darlene Lokey Anderson· hearing

Summary

A 44-year-old defense contractor Security Officer was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline I (Psychological Conditions), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from a history of criminal conduct, psychological conditions, and personal conduct issues, including threatening a federal official, a diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder, non-compliance with treatment, and providing false information on her security clearance application.

Specifically, the applicant was arrested in October 1997 for threatening a federal official, a felony, after making numerous threatening calls and sending letters to a Congressman's office. She was found incompetent to stand trial due to a mental defect, committed for approximately 120 days of psychiatric treatment, and later placed in an 18-month deferred prosecution program requiring medication compliance and no contact with the Congressman's office.

Further issues included a diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder with delusions, including a belief in a government conspiracy, and a history of non-compliance with treatment. The applicant also provided false information during a September 2007 psychiatric evaluation by failing to disclose her prior psychiatric treatment and hospitalization. Additionally, she refused to sign a medical release for counseling and treatment records in June 2006. The clearance was denied because the applicant engaged in criminal conduct, has psychological conditions impairing judgment, and deliberately falsified her application.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant engaged in criminal conduct by threatening a federal official, which raises doubts about her judgment and reliability.
The applicant has a history of psychological conditions that impair her judgment, including Bipolar Disorder and delusions.
The applicant deliberately falsified her security clearance application by omitting her psychiatric history and felony charges.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

J 31(a)raisedCriminal Conduct
J 31(c)raisedCriminal Conduct
I 28(a)raisedPsychological Conditions
I 28(b)raisedPsychological Conditions
E 16(a)raisedPersonal Conduct
E 16(b)raisedPersonal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“The adjudicative process is an examination of a sufficient period of a person’s life to make an affirmative determination that the person is an acceptable security risk.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMay 9, 2008
Answer filedJun 5, 2008
Hearing heldAug 5, 2008
Decision dateSep 25, 2008

Cite For

Disqualifying Conditions Related to Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Disqualifying Conditions Related to Psychological Conditions Under Guideline I
Disqualifying Conditions Related to Personal Conduct Under Guideline E

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
3.a	The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because he intentionally falsified material aspects of his personal background during the clearance screening process.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	—	—	—
3.b	The Applicant indicated that upon the advise of her attorney she answered the question in that manner.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	—	—	—
3.c	On June 16, 2006, in response to a request by a DoD investigator, the Applicant refused to a sign a medical release for counseling and treatment records concerning her hospitalization at Federal Medical Center, Carswell, Fort Worth, Texas.	Against Applicant	Failure to Cooperate with Security Processing	—	Denied	—	—	—
3.d	On September 13, 2007, during an evaluation at the Psychiatric Centers in San Diego, the Applicant provided false information to the medical provider by failing to disclose her history of psychiatric treatment and hospitalization in December 1997 and from January 1998, to March 1998 at the Federal Medical Center, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Carswell, Fort Worth, Texas.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because he intentionally falsified material aspects of his personal background during the clearance screening process.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

—

3.b

The Applicant indicated that upon the advise of her attorney she answered the question in that manner.

Against Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

—

3.c

On June 16, 2006, in response to a request by a DoD investigator, the Applicant refused to a sign a medical release for counseling and treatment records concerning her hospitalization at Federal Medical Center, Carswell, Fort Worth, Texas.

Against Applicant

Failure to Cooperate with Security Processing

—

Denied

—

3.d

On September 13, 2007, during an evaluation at the Psychiatric Centers in San Diego, the Applicant provided false information to the medical provider by failing to disclose her history of psychiatric treatment and hospitalization in December 1997 and from January 1998, to March 1998 at the Federal Medical Center, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Carswell, Fort Worth, Texas.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶28)	Mitigating applied (¶29)	Mitigation
2.a	The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because she has certain emotional mental, and personality conditions that can impair her judgment, reliability or trustworthiness.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Psychological Condition	Denied	(a) behavior that casts doubt on judgment/stability/reliability/trustworthiness, not covered under any other guideline, indicating an emotional/mental/per… (b) an opinion by a duly qualified mental health professional that the individual has a condition that may impair judgment/stability/reliability/trustwort… (c) voluntary or involuntary inpatient hospitalization	—	—
2.b	The Applicant was found to be suffering from a mental defect, rendering her incompetent to understand the nature and consequences of the proceeding against her. It was ordered that she undergo psychiatric treatment.	Against Applicant	Psychiatric Hospitalization	Denied	(a) behavior that casts doubt on judgment/stability/reliability/trustworthiness, not covered under any other guideline, indicating an emotional/mental/per… (b) an opinion by a duly qualified mental health professional that the individual has a condition that may impair judgment/stability/reliability/trustwort… (c) voluntary or involuntary inpatient hospitalization	—	—
2.c	The Applicant suffers from Bipolar Disorder, delusions, including a belief in a government conspiracy against her and that she will need treatment for her illness in the foreseeable future.	Against Applicant	Mood Disorder Diagnosed	Denied	(a) behavior that casts doubt on judgment/stability/reliability/trustworthiness, not covered under any other guideline, indicating an emotional/mental/per… (b) an opinion by a duly qualified mental health professional that the individual has a condition that may impair judgment/stability/reliability/trustwort… (c) voluntary or involuntary inpatient hospitalization	—	—
2.d	The Applicant had not been compliant with treatment efforts.	Against Applicant	Treatment Non Compliance Psych	Denied	(c) voluntary or involuntary inpatient hospitalization	—	—
3.a–3.d	4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (3 against, 1 for the applicant). (low confidence)	Mixed			—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶28)

Mitigating applied (¶29)

Mitigation

2.a

The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because she has certain emotional mental, and personality conditions that can impair her judgment, reliability or trustworthiness.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Psychological Condition

Denied

(a) behavior that casts doubt on judgment/stability/reliability/trustworthiness, not covered under any other guideline, indicating an emotional/mental/per…

(b) an opinion by a duly qualified mental health professional that the individual has a condition that may impair judgment/stability/reliability/trustwort…

(c) voluntary or involuntary inpatient hospitalization

—

2.b

The Applicant was found to be suffering from a mental defect, rendering her incompetent to understand the nature and consequences of the proceeding against her. It was ordered that she undergo psychiatric treatment.

Against Applicant

Psychiatric Hospitalization

Denied

(a) behavior that casts doubt on judgment/stability/reliability/trustworthiness, not covered under any other guideline, indicating an emotional/mental/per…

(b) an opinion by a duly qualified mental health professional that the individual has a condition that may impair judgment/stability/reliability/trustwort…

(c) voluntary or involuntary inpatient hospitalization

—

2.c

The Applicant suffers from Bipolar Disorder, delusions, including a belief in a government conspiracy against her and that she will need treatment for her illness in the foreseeable future.

Against Applicant

Mood Disorder Diagnosed

Denied

(a) behavior that casts doubt on judgment/stability/reliability/trustworthiness, not covered under any other guideline, indicating an emotional/mental/per…

(b) an opinion by a duly qualified mental health professional that the individual has a condition that may impair judgment/stability/reliability/trustwort…

(c) voluntary or involuntary inpatient hospitalization

—

2.d

The Applicant had not been compliant with treatment efforts.

Against Applicant

Treatment Non Compliance Psych

Denied

(c) voluntary or involuntary inpatient hospitalization

—

3.a–3.d

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

Mixed

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because she engaged in criminal conduct.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	—	—
2.a	On October 8, 1997, the Applicant was arrested and charged with Threatening a Federal Official in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sections 115 and 1114, both felonies.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	—	—
2.b	The charges were based upon the following information: The Applicant is said to have made numerous telephone calls and sent letters to a Congressman’s office which contained verbal assaults and threats to kill members of his staff.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	—	—
3.a	The Applicant was found to be suffering from a mental defect, rendering her incompetent to understand the nature and consequences of the proceeding against her.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	—	—
3.b	The Applicant was committed to the custody of the Attorney General for about 120 days of treatment.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	—	—
3.c	The Applicant had not been compliant with treatment efforts.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	—	—
3.d	The Applicant was released from treatment and appeared in court in May 1998. The court placed her in a deferred prosecution program where she was on probation for about 18 months, with the condition that she remain medicine compliant and in treatment and not contact the Congressman’s office.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because she engaged in criminal conduct.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(c) currently on parole or probation

—

2.a

On October 8, 1997, the Applicant was arrested and charged with Threatening a Federal Official in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sections 115 and 1114, both felonies.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(c) currently on parole or probation

—

2.b

The charges were based upon the following information: The Applicant is said to have made numerous telephone calls and sent letters to a Congressman’s office which contained verbal assaults and threats to kill members of his staff.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(c) currently on parole or probation

—

3.a

The Applicant was found to be suffering from a mental defect, rendering her incompetent to understand the nature and consequences of the proceeding against her.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(c) currently on parole or probation

—

3.b

The Applicant was committed to the custody of the Attorney General for about 120 days of treatment.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(c) currently on parole or probation

—

3.c

The Applicant had not been compliant with treatment efforts.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(c) currently on parole or probation

—

3.d

The Applicant was released from treatment and appeared in court in May 1998. The court placed her in a deferred prosecution program where she was on probation for about 18 months, with the condition that she remain medicine compliant and in treatment and not contact the Congressman’s office.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Denied

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(c) currently on parole or probation

—

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

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION