ISCR Case 07-13618.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 07-13618.h1

deniedSep 16, 2008· Hon. Roger C. Wesley· hearing

Summary

A 45-year-old computer integration specialist with military service was denied a security clearance under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from his intentional failure to disclose a 1996 domestic violence incident and subsequent criminal charges on multiple security clearance applications (e-QIPs) in October and December 2006. He only revealed the information when confronted by an OPM investigator in March 2007.

The 1996 incident involved an arrest and felony charges for inflicting corporal injury on a spouse, terrorist threats, and obstructing justice. He later pled guilty to a lesser charge of spousal abuse, receiving 18 months of probation and an order to complete an anger management course, which remained uncompleted as of January 2008. Although the felony assault charge was later reduced to a misdemeanor in October 2006, the applicant still failed to disclose the incident.

The judge found the applicant's omissions to be intentional and calculated to conceal his criminal history, raising significant concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness. His explanations for the omissions were deemed not credible, failing to demonstrate good faith efforts to correct the inaccuracies. Consequently, the applicant's conduct raised serious doubts about his judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant intentionally omitted his domestic violence arrest and charges from his security clearance applications.
The applicant's explanations for the omissions were not credible and failed to demonstrate good faith efforts to correct the inaccuracies.
The applicant's conduct raised serious doubts about his judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 18raisedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 18raisedPersonal Conduct

Mitigating

MC ¶ 32(a)rejectedTime ElapsedThe applicant's criminal conduct was not sufficiently mitigated by the time elapsed since the incident.
MC ¶ 32(d)appliedSuccessful RehabilitationThe applicant's positive work record and family commitments were considered in mitigation of his criminal conduct.

Key Rule Quoted

“A decision to grant or continue an applicant's security clearance may be made only upon a threshold finding that to do so is clearly consistent with the national interest.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 4, 2008
Answer filedApr 29, 2008
Hearing heldJul 30, 2008
Decision dateSep 16, 2008

Cite For

Intentional Omissions in Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
Impact of Criminal Conduct on Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline J
Credibility of Applicant's Explanations for Omissions During the Security Clearance Process

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
2.a	Falsified the security clearance application (e-QIP) he completed in October 2006 by failing to disclose his earlier felony arrest/charges in October 2006 arrest in multiple places on the form.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
2.b	Repeated his arrest/charges when completing an updated e-QIP in December 2006, and failed to disclose his 2006 arrest/charges until confronted by an investigator from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in March 2007.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
2.c	Failed to disclose his 2006 arrest/charges until confronted by an investigator from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in March 2007.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
2.d–2.e	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)	Against Applicant		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Falsified the security clearance application (e-QIP) he completed in October 2006 by failing to disclose his earlier felony arrest/charges in October 2006 arrest in multiple places on the form.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

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

(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern

—

2.b

Repeated his arrest/charges when completing an updated e-QIP in December 2006, and failed to disclose his 2006 arrest/charges until confronted by an investigator from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in March 2007.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

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

(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern

—

2.c

Failed to disclose his 2006 arrest/charges until confronted by an investigator from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in March 2007.

Against Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

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

(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern

—

2.d–2.e

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

Against Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant was arrested in October 1996 and charged with inflict corporal injury on spouse (a felony offense), terrorist threats (a felony offense), and obstruct justice (a felony offense), to which he pled guilty to a lesser charge of spousal abuse and was sentenced to 18 months of probation and ordered to complete an anger management course, which he had not completed as of January 2008.	For Applicant	Domestic Violence	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur	—
1.b	Applicant was charged with felony domestic assault on the date of his arrest in October 1996. In his first court appearance in November 2006, the court explained the newly amended misdemeanor charges filed on October 30, 2006 to him, and afforded him the opportunity to obtain an attorney. The State’s amended charge replaced the felony assault charge with a reduced charge of corporal injury to spouse/co-habitant/child’s parent (a misdemeanor offense).	For Applicant	Domestic Violence	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant was arrested in October 1996 and charged with inflict corporal injury on spouse (a felony offense), terrorist threats (a felony offense), and obstruct justice (a felony offense), to which he pled guilty to a lesser charge of spousal abuse and was sentenced to 18 months of probation and ordered to complete an anger management course, which he had not completed as of January 2008.

For Applicant

Domestic Violence

Convicted

Admitted

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

(c) currently on parole or probation

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

—

1.b

Applicant was charged with felony domestic assault on the date of his arrest in October 1996. In his first court appearance in November 2006, the court explained the newly amended misdemeanor charges filed on October 30, 2006 to him, and afforded him the opportunity to obtain an attorney. The State’s amended charge replaced the felony assault charge with a reduced charge of corporal injury to spouse/co-habitant/child’s parent (a misdemeanor offense).

For Applicant

Domestic Violence

Convicted

Admitted

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

(c) currently on parole or probation

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

—

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

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION