A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.
ISCR Case No. 11-00595.h1
DeniedDecided Jan 11, 2013 · Administrative Judge James F. Duffy · Hearing
Case headnote
Summary
The applicant, a pro se individual, faced security concerns under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), H (Drug Involvement), and M (Misuse of Information Technology Systems). The applicant's failure to mitigate these concerns led to the denial of security clearance.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to mitigate the security concerns related to drug involvement.
- The applicant's misuse of information technology systems was not adequately addressed.
- Personal conduct issues were not sufficiently resolved to meet the security clearance requirements.
Conditions referenced
Disqualifying
- H Drug Involvementraised
- M Misuse of Information Technology Systemsraised
- E Personal Conductraised
Procedural posture
- SOR issued
- August 30, 2012
- Answer filed
- October 1, 2012
- Hearing held
- Decision date
- 01/11/2013
Cite for
- Failure to Mitigate Security Concerns Under Guideline H Regarding Drug Involvement
- Failure to Address Issues Under Guideline M Concerning Misuse of Information Technology Systems
- Insufficient Resolution of Personal Conduct Issues 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.
From the decision
Facts this decision states, each with the sentence it comes from. Descriptive of the record, not an assessment.
Allegations under Guideline E
Reading the 7 per allegation rows needs a free account.
7 rows in this decision.
It opens the per allegation record on every guideline: the amounts, the findings, and the sentence behind each row.
Allegations under Guideline H
Reading the 4 per allegation rows needs a free account.
4 rows in this decision.
It opens the per allegation record on every guideline: the amounts, the findings, and the sentence behind each row.
Allegations under Guideline M
Reading the 8 per allegation rows needs a free account.
8 rows in this decision.
It opens the per allegation record on every guideline: the amounts, the findings, and the sentence behind each row.
Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case. The verbatim source decision is below.
Full decision
Open original PDFThe complete official text, footnotes and signatures included, is in the original PDF.
Decision text, by section
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS
In the matter of: ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 11-00595 ) Applicant for Security Clearance )
Appearances
For Government: Chris Morin, Esquire, Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se
01/11/2013 ______________
Decision
______________
DUFFY, James F., Administrative Judge:
Applicant failed to mitigate the security concerns arising under Guidelines H (Drug Involvement), M (Misuse of Information Technology Systems), and E (Personal Conduct). Eligibility for access to classified information is denied.
Statement of the Case
On August 30, 2012, the Department of Defense (DoD) issued Applicant a Statement of Reasons (SOR) detailing security concerns under Guidelines H, M, and E. This action was taken under Executive Order (EO) 10865, Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry (February 20, 1960), as amended; Department of Defense Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program (January 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); and the adjudicative guidelines (AG) implemented on September 1, 2006.
The SOR set forth reasons why DoD adjudicators could not make the preliminary affirmative finding under the Directive that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant Applicant a security clearance. On October 1, 2012, Applicant