ISCR Case 12-03913.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 12-03913.h1

deniedJan 10, 2013· Hon. Jennifer I. Goldstein· hearing

Summary

A 52-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline D (Sexual Behavior) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The applicant engaged in an unreported extramarital relationship with a foreign national from 2009 through 2010. This individual was employed as a "lingerie model" or lap dancer, and the applicant admitted to attempts to hide his activities from his wife, co-workers, and Facility Security Officer (FSO).

The applicant failed to disclose this relationship until he faced a polygraph examination. When he did disclose it, he intentionally falsified a Form 20, stating the foreign national was a fitness therapist and that they met at her place of business, thereby misleading the FSO about their initial introduction and interactions. This conduct raised disqualifying conditions related to sexual behavior that could make him vulnerable to coercion or exploitation, and personal conduct reflecting a lack of discretion and judgment.

The judge found that the applicant's unreported relationship with a foreign national, his failure to disclose it until a polygraph, and his ongoing financial support of the individual raised significant questions about his reliability and trustworthiness, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant engaged in an unreported extramarital relationship with a foreign national, raising security concerns under Guidelines D and E.
He failed to disclose the relationship until faced with a polygraph examination, demonstrating a lack of candor and questionable judgment.
The applicant's ongoing financial support of the foreign national further exacerbated concerns about his vulnerability to coercion.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 16(a)raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant Facts
AG ¶ 16(b)raisedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information
AG ¶ 16(e)raisedPersonal Conduct That Creates a Vulnerability to Exploitation
AG ¶ 13(c)raisedSexual Behavior That Causes Vulnerability to Coercion
AG ¶ 13(d)raisedSexual Behavior Reflecting Lack of Discretion or Judgment

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to classified information will be resolved in favor of national security.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 17, 2012
Answer filedOct 19, 2012
Hearing heldDec 14, 2012
Decision dateJan 10, 2013

Cite For

Lack of Candor in Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
Vulnerability to Coercion Due to Personal Conduct Under Guideline D
Failure to Mitigate Ongoing Relationships with Foreign Nationals Affecting Security Clearance Eligibility

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶13)	Mitigating applied (¶14)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant engaged in sexual behavior that makes him vulnerable to coercion, exploitation, or duress, and reflected a lack of discretion and judgment. He admitted his extra-marital affair with Miss X and his attempts to hide his activities from his wife, his co-workers, and his FSO. While neither the affair nor his decision to frequent the club were illegal, his embarrassment over his previous and repeated sexual behavior in a public setting reflects his lack of discretion and judgment. The evidence supports the application of both disqualifying conditions.	Against Applicant	Extramarital Relationship with Coercion Risk	Admitted	(c) sexual behavior that causes an individual to be vulnerable to coercion, exploitation, or duress (d) sexual behavior of a public nature or that reflects lack of discretion or judgment	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶13)

Mitigating applied (¶14)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant engaged in sexual behavior that makes him vulnerable to coercion, exploitation, or duress, and reflected a lack of discretion and judgment. He admitted his extra-marital affair with Miss X and his attempts to hide his activities from his wife, his co-workers, and his FSO. While neither the affair nor his decision to frequent the club were illegal, his embarrassment over his previous and repeated sexual behavior in a public setting reflects his lack of discretion and judgment. The evidence supports the application of both disqualifying conditions.

Against Applicant

Extramarital Relationship with Coercion Risk

Admitted

(c) sexual behavior that causes an individual to be vulnerable to coercion, exploitation, or duress

(d) sexual behavior of a public nature or that reflects lack of discretion or judgment

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
1.a	From 2009 through 2010, Applicant had an unreported, extra-marital relationship with a foreign national who was employed as a “lingerie model” or lap dancer.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official (e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation	—	—
1.b	He failed to disclose his relationship with Miss X, a foreign national he met at the club, until he faced a polygraph examination.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Foreign Contacts or Interests	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official (e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation	—	—
1.c	When he disclosed their relationship, he stated that she was a fitness therapist on the Form 20 and indicated they met at her place of business, thereby intentionally falsifying the Form 20 and misleading the FSO about the true nature of their initial introduction and interactions.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	—	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official (e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

1.a

From 2009 through 2010, Applicant had an unreported, extra-marital relationship with a foreign national who was employed as a “lingerie model” or lap dancer.

Against Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

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

(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official

(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation

—

1.b

He failed to disclose his relationship with Miss X, a foreign national he met at the club, until he faced a polygraph examination.

Against Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE

Foreign Contacts or Interests

Admitted

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

(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official

(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation

—

1.c

When he disclosed their relationship, he stated that she was a fitness therapist on the Form 20 and indicated they met at her place of business, thereby intentionally falsifying the Form 20 and misleading the FSO about the true nature of their initial introduction and interactions.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

—

Admitted

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

(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official

(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation

—

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

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION