Summary
A U.S. citizen born in Ethiopia was denied a security clearance under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct) and J (Criminal Conduct) due to past misconduct and a failure to disclose relevant information. The applicant resigned from a federal contractor position in March 2000 in lieu of termination, following an incident involving the viewing of inappropriate websites on a government computer.
Additionally, the applicant was charged with two counts of illegally soliciting fares at an airport, resulting in a conviction on one count and a fine totaling $355, including court costs. The applicant then falsified his security clearance application by deliberately failing to disclose both his unfavorable resignation from employment and his criminal conviction for illegal solicitation.
The judge determined that the applicant's explanations for these omissions were implausible and unconvincing. These actions raised significant concerns about the applicant's reliability and trustworthiness, leading to the denial of the security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant resigned from a federal contractor position under unfavorable circumstances due to viewing pornographic materials on a government computer.
- The applicant failed to disclose his resignation and a criminal conviction for illegal solicitation on his security clearance application, which constituted falsification.
- The applicant's explanations for his omissions were deemed implausible and unconvincing.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 16(a)raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts From Any Personnel Security Questionnaire.
- AG ¶ 16(c)appliedCredible Adverse Information in Several Adjudicative Issue Areas That Is Not Sufficient for an Adverse Determination Under Any Other Single Guideline.
- AG ¶ 16(d)appliedCredible Adverse Information That Is Not Explicitly Covered Under Any Other Guideline.
- AG ¶ 16(e)appliedPersonal Conduct, or Concealment of Information About One's Conduct, That Creates a Vulnerability to Exploitation, Manipulation, or Duress.
- AG ¶ 17(c)appliedThe Offense Is so Minor, or so Much Time Has Passed, or the Behavior Is so Infrequent, or It Happened Under Such Unique Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur.The misuse of a government computer occurred more than nine years ago, and the applicant's embarrassment and greater maturity make it unlikely to recur.
- AG ¶ 17(d)rejectedThe Individual Has Acknowledged the Behavior and Obtained Counseling to Change the Behavior or Taken Other Positive Steps to Alleviate the Stressors, Circumstances, or Factors That Caused Untrustworthy, Unreliable, or Other Inappropriate Behavior.The applicant acknowledged his past misconduct but did not take steps to correct his application omissions until confronted.
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 issuedApr 9, 2009
- Answer filedMay 1, 2009
- Hearing heldSep 16, 2009Hearing rescheduled due to applicant's counsel's request.
- Decision dateOct 30, 2009
Cite For
- Falsification of Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
- Impact of Past Misconduct on Security Clearance Eligibility
- Consideration of Mitigating Factors in Personal Conduct Cases