ISCR Case 07-13621.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 07-13621.h1

grantedJul 10, 2008· Hon. Noreen A. Lynch· hearing

Summary

A 22-year-old defense contractor employee was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) stemming from past criminal conduct. The Statement of Reasons detailed several incidents, including a March 2005 arrest for felony Possession of Burglary Tools, Tampering with a Vehicle, and Trespassing, for which he pleaded guilty and received a sentence including 15 days of weekend community service, a $500 fine, and six months of supervised probation.

Additionally, in April 2005, the applicant was charged with Petit Larceny for stealing pizzas, resulting in a guilty verdict, a fine, a six-month suspended sentence, and 24 hours of community service. Further allegations included a 2007 speeding ticket and driving with an open container, cited as poor judgment. The applicant's embarrassment about these incidents was also noted as a disqualifying condition related to personal conduct.

Despite these issues, the judge found that the applicant had demonstrated significant rehabilitation and maturity. Mitigating factors included his admission of past conduct, stable employment with high performance in an apprenticeship program, strong employer recommendations, and his current responsibilities as a father, all indicating a reduced risk of future misconduct. Based on this evidence, the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant admitted to past criminal conduct but demonstrated significant rehabilitation and maturity since those incidents.
He has maintained a stable job with high performance in an apprenticeship program and has strong recommendations from his employer.
The applicant's current responsibilities as a father and his commitment to his job indicate a reduced risk of future misconduct.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 31(a)raisedCriminal Conduct - Serious Crime
AG ¶ 31(c)raisedCriminal Conduct - Admission of Criminal Conduct
AG ¶ 16(a)raisedPersonal Conduct - Deliberate Omission or Concealment
AG ¶ 16(c)raisedPersonal Conduct - Credible Adverse Information
AG ¶ 16(d)raisedPersonal Conduct - Credible Adverse Information
AG ¶ 16(e)raisedPersonal Conduct - Vulnerability to Exploitation

Mitigating

AG ¶ 32(a)appliedCriminal Conduct - Time Elapsed
AG ¶ 30(d)appliedCriminal Conduct - Evidence of Rehabilitation
AG ¶ 17(c)appliedPersonal Conduct - Minor Offense or Time Passed
AG ¶ 17(d)appliedPersonal Conduct - Acknowledgment and Counseling
AG ¶ 17(e)appliedPersonal Conduct - Positive Steps to Reduce Vulnerability

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMar 5, 2008
Answer filedApr 21, 2008
Hearing heldJun 20, 2008Applicant testified pro se.
Decision dateJul 10, 2008

Cite For

Mitigating Factors for Past Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Consideration of Personal Conduct Under Guideline E
Whole Person Assessment 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
2.a	In March 2005, Applicant was charged with Petit Larceny for stealing the pizzas from the delivery man at the shipyard. He did not wait to pay for the pizzas because he wanted to return to work. He was found guilty, was fined, sentenced to six-months suspended sentence and 24 hours of community service.	For Applicant	Rules Violation at Workplace	—	Admitted	—	(c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances	—
2.b	Applicant's speeding ticket in 2007 and driving with an open container relates to poor judgment and falls under 16(d).	For Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	—	(c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances	—
2.c	The AG ¶ 16 continues: (e) personal conduct, or concealment of information about one’s conduct that creates a vulnerability to exploitation, manipulation or duress, such as (1) engaging in activities which, if known, may affect the person’s personal, professional, or community standing. This disqualifying condition is a factor for consideration because Applicant was embarrassed about the incidents.	For Applicant	Concealment Creating Coercion Vulnerability	—	Admitted	—	(c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

In March 2005, Applicant was charged with Petit Larceny for stealing the pizzas from the delivery man at the shipyard. He did not wait to pay for the pizzas because he wanted to return to work. He was found guilty, was fined, sentenced to six-months suspended sentence and 24 hours of community service.

For Applicant

Rules Violation at Workplace

—

Admitted

—

(c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances

—

2.b

Applicant's speeding ticket in 2007 and driving with an open container relates to poor judgment and falls under 16(d).

For Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

—

(c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances

—

2.c

The AG ¶ 16 continues: (e) personal conduct, or concealment of information about one’s conduct that creates a vulnerability to exploitation, manipulation or duress, such as (1) engaging in activities which, if known, may affect the person’s personal, professional, or community standing. This disqualifying condition is a factor for consideration because Applicant was embarrassed about the incidents.

For Applicant

Concealment Creating Coercion Vulnerability

—

Admitted

—

(c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	On March 29, 2005, Applicant was arrested and charged with felony Possession of Burglary Tools, Tampering with Vehicle, and Trespassing. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 12 months incarceration with 11 months suspended. He served 15 days of weekend community service. The court fined him $500 and sentenced him to six months of supervised probation.	For Applicant	Trespassing or Burglary	Convicted	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	—
1.b	In April 2005, Applicant was charged with Petit Larceny for stealing pizzas from a delivery man. He was found guilty, was fined, sentenced to a six-month suspended sentence, and required to complete 24 hours of community service.	For Applicant	Theft or Larceny	Convicted	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

On March 29, 2005, Applicant was arrested and charged with felony Possession of Burglary Tools, Tampering with Vehicle, and Trespassing. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 12 months incarceration with 11 months suspended. He served 15 days of weekend community service. The court fined him $500 and sentenced him to six months of supervised probation.

For Applicant

Trespassing or Burglary

Convicted

Admitted

—

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

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

—

1.b

In April 2005, Applicant was charged with Petit Larceny for stealing pizzas from a delivery man. He was found guilty, was fined, sentenced to a six-month suspended sentence, and required to complete 24 hours of community service.

For Applicant

Theft or Larceny

Convicted

Admitted

—

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

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

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