ISCR Case 09-01515.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 09-01515.h1

deniedJun 21, 2010· Hon. Darlene Lokey Anderson· hearing

Summary

A 20-year-old engineer technician was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline H (Drug Involvement), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons detailed multiple instances of questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations. These included admitted driving infractions and a history of illegal drug use.

Specifically, the applicant used marijuana two or three times between December 2007 and January 2008, and cocaine and ecstasy on one occasion in January 2008. A drug screening test by his probation officer in January 2008 also returned positive for illegal drugs. The applicant attributed his drug use to peer pressure and stated he no longer associates with drug users.

Further issues involved criminal conduct, including an August 2005 arrest for Grand Theft from Person when he was fifteen, which was ultimately dismissed after he unintentionally missed a court date. In September 2007, he was arrested and charged with felony Burglary for shoplifting. This resulted in one year of supervised probation, 80 hours of community service, and 20 hours of Narcotics Anonymous or Alcoholics Anonymous meetings. The judge found the applicant's conduct demonstrated unreliability and untrustworthiness, concluding that his recent conduct and lack of maturity were inconsistent with the requirements for access to classified information, and denied the clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to engaging in questionable conduct, including multiple driving infractions and illegal drug use.
The applicant has a history of criminal conduct, including arrests for grand theft and burglary.
The applicant's recent conduct and lack of maturity were deemed inconsistent with the requirements for access to classified information.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E.16(c)appliedCredible Adverse Information in Several Adjudicative Issue Areas
H.25(a)appliedAny Drug Abuse
J.31(a)appliedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses
J.31(c)appliedAllegation or Admission of Criminal 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 issuedNov 23, 2009
Answer filedDec 9, 2009
Hearing heldApr 15, 2010
Decision dateJun 21, 2010

Cite For

Assessment of Poor Judgment Under Guideline E
Impact of Illegal Drug Use on Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline H
Consideration of Criminal Conduct in Security Clearance Determinations Under Guideline J

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
1.a	The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.b	The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.c	The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.d	The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.e	The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.f	The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.g	The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.h	The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.i	The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
2.a–3.a	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

1.a

The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.

Against Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

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

—

1.b

The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.

Against Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

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

—

1.c

The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.

Against Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

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

—

1.d

The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.

Against Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

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

—

1.e

The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.

Against Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

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

—

1.f

The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.

Against Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

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

—

1.g

The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.

Against Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

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

—

1.h

The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.

Against Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

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

—

1.i

The Applicant engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations.

Against Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

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

—

2.a–3.a

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

Against Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
2.a	The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because he abuses illegal drugs.	Against Applicant	Marijuana	Occasional	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	—
2.b	The Applicant used marijuana two or three times between December 2007 and January 2008.	Against Applicant	Marijuana	Occasional	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	—
2.c	The Applicant used cocaine and ecstasy on one occasion on the same day in January 2008.	Against Applicant	Cocaine	Experimental	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	—
2.d	The Applicant tested positive for illegal drugs during a drug screening test by his probation officer in January 2008.	Against Applicant	Drug Test Failure	Not Applicable	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	—
2.e	The Applicant attributes his illegal drug use to peer pressure.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	Claimed Other
2.f	The Applicant no longer associates with any drug users.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia	—	Claimed Other
2.g–2.i	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)	Against Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

2.a

The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because he abuses illegal drugs.

Against Applicant

Marijuana

Occasional

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia

—

2.b

The Applicant used marijuana two or three times between December 2007 and January 2008.

Against Applicant

Marijuana

Occasional

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia

—

2.c

The Applicant used cocaine and ecstasy on one occasion on the same day in January 2008.

Against Applicant

Cocaine

Experimental

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia

—

2.d

The Applicant tested positive for illegal drugs during a drug screening test by his probation officer in January 2008.

Against Applicant

Drug Test Failure

Not Applicable

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia

—

2.e

The Applicant attributes his illegal drug use to peer pressure.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Unspecified

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia

—

Claimed

Other

2.f

The Applicant no longer associates with any drug users.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Unspecified

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia

—

Claimed

Other

2.g–2.i

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

Against Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Unspecified

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
3.a	In August 2005, the Applicant was arrested for Grand Theft from Person. He explained the circumstances of this arrest. He was fifteen years old at the time. He and his friends were waiting in line for ice cream. The person in front of them had a $5.00 bill showing. Applicant claims that his friend took the $5.00 bill and ran. The police arrived, and the Applicant told the officer that he did not know who took the money. The Applicant was instructed to empty his pockets and he had a $5.00 bill. Applicant believes that he upset the officer because he was not listening to him. Applicant was accused of stealing the money, and was arrested and taken to jail. Applicant was issued a citation and required to appear in court. Unintentionally, he missed his court date and a warrant was issued for his arrest. The court ultimately dismissed the case.	Against Applicant	Theft or Larceny	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	—	—
3.b	In September 2007, the Applicant was arrested and charged with Burglary, a felony. He explained the circumstances of this arrest. Applicant and a friend went into a department store to steal. The Applicant took a bottle of alcohol, his friend took some clothes, alcohol and candy. They were stopped by a security guard as they were walking out of the door. They tried to run, but were caught. The police were called and the Applicant was arrested and taken to jail. The Applicant was placed on supervised probation for one year, complete 80 hours of community service, and attend 20 hours of either Narcotics Anonymous or Alcoholics Anonymous meetings. Applicant attributes his bad conduct to hanging around the wrong crowd.	Against Applicant	Trespassing or Burglary	Convicted	Admitted	(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

3.a

In August 2005, the Applicant was arrested for Grand Theft from Person. He explained the circumstances of this arrest. He was fifteen years old at the time. He and his friends were waiting in line for ice cream. The person in front of them had a $5.00 bill showing. Applicant claims that his friend took the $5.00 bill and ran. The police arrived, and the Applicant told the officer that he did not know who took the money. The Applicant was instructed to empty his pockets and he had a $5.00 bill. Applicant believes that he upset the officer because he was not listening to him. Applicant was accused of stealing the money, and was arrested and taken to jail. Applicant was issued a citation and required to appear in court. Unintentionally, he missed his court date and a warrant was issued for his arrest. The court ultimately dismissed the case.

Against Applicant

Theft or Larceny

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

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

(c) currently on parole or probation

—

3.b

In September 2007, the Applicant was arrested and charged with Burglary, a felony. He explained the circumstances of this arrest. Applicant and a friend went into a department store to steal. The Applicant took a bottle of alcohol, his friend took some clothes, alcohol and candy. They were stopped by a security guard as they were walking out of the door. They tried to run, but were caught. The police were called and the Applicant was arrested and taken to jail. The Applicant was placed on supervised probation for one year, complete 80 hours of community service, and attend 20 hours of either Narcotics Anonymous or Alcoholics Anonymous meetings. Applicant attributes his bad conduct to hanging around the wrong crowd.

Against Applicant

Trespassing or Burglary

Convicted

Admitted

(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