ISCR Case 01-03132.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 01-03132.h1

grantedJan 31, 2002· Hon. Burt Smith· hearing

Summary

A 46-year-old procurement specialist for a defense contractor was granted a security clearance despite allegations under Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons cited a fifteen-year pattern of off-duty misconduct, including illegal gambling and hiring prostitutes, some of which occurred while holding a prior security clearance. Additionally, the applicant was alleged to have been untruthful during official interviews with a DoD investigator and to have failed to provide full and accurate information.

Disqualifying conditions E1, E3, E4, and E6 were raised. However, mitigating conditions E5 and E7 were applied. The applicant presented persuasive evidence of significant reform and changed behavior following years of misconduct.

Strong character references from co-workers attested to the applicant's honesty and reliability, and the applicant established a credible intent to avoid past illegal activities. Based on this evidence, the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant presented persuasive evidence of reform and changed behavior after years of misconduct.
Strong character references from co-workers attested to the applicant's honesty and reliability.
The applicant's credible intent to avoid past illegal activities was established.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E1raisedReliable, Unfavorable Information Provided by Associates, Employers, Coworkers, Neighbors, and Other Acquaintances
E3raisedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information Concerning Relevant and Material Matters to an Investigator
E4raisedPersonal Conduct or Concealment of Information That May Increase an Individual's Vulnerability to Coercion, Exploitation or Duress
E6raisedAssociation with Persons Involved in Criminal Activity

Mitigating

E5appliedThe Individual Has Taken Positive Steps to Significantly Reduce or Eliminate Vulnerability to Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress
E7appliedAssociation with Persons Involved in Criminal Activity Has Ceased

Key Rule Quoted

“The nature, extent and seriousness of the conduct; the circumstances surrounding the conduct, to include knowledgeable participation; the frequency and recency of the conduct; the individual's age and maturity at the time of the conduct; the voluntariness of participation; the presence or absence of rehabilitation and other pertinent behavioral changes; the motivation for the conduct; the potential for pressure, coercion, exploitation, or duress; and the likelihood of continuation or recurrence.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 21, 2001
Answer filedJul 16, 2001undated answer received by DOHA
Hearing heldNov 20, 2001
Decision dateJan 31, 2002

Cite For

Evidence of Reform and Changed Behavior Under Guideline E
Character References Supporting Applicant's Good Character
Whole Person Concept in Security Clearance Evaluations

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 is ineligible for clearance because he has engaged in a pattern of off-duty misconduct involving illegal gambling and payment for sexual services from prostitutes.	For Applicant	Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations	—	Denied	—	(g) association was unwitting, has ceased, or casts no doubt	—
1.b	The Government also alleges Applicant engaged in these prohibited activities while holding a security clearance.	For Applicant	Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations	—	Denied	—	(g) association was unwitting, has ceased, or casts no doubt	—
1.c	The Government also alleges he was untruthful during official interviews with a DoD investigator.	For Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewNOT DELIBERATE	—	Denied	(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	(g) association was unwitting, has ceased, or casts no doubt	—
1.d	The Applicant's past illegal activities involving gambling and the use of prostitutes.	For Applicant	Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations	—	Denied	—	(g) association was unwitting, has ceased, or casts no doubt	—
1.e	The Applicant's failure to provide full and accurate information to the Government's agent.	For Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewNOT DELIBERATE	—	Denied	(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	(g) association was unwitting, has ceased, or casts no doubt	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

1.a

The Applicant is ineligible for clearance because he has engaged in a pattern of off-duty misconduct involving illegal gambling and payment for sexual services from prostitutes.

For Applicant

Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations

—

Denied

—

(g) association was unwitting, has ceased, or casts no doubt

—

1.b

The Government also alleges Applicant engaged in these prohibited activities while holding a security clearance.

For Applicant

Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations

—

Denied

—

(g) association was unwitting, has ceased, or casts no doubt

—

1.c

The Government also alleges he was untruthful during official interviews with a DoD investigator.

For Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewNOT DELIBERATE

—

Denied

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

(g) association was unwitting, has ceased, or casts no doubt

—

1.d

The Applicant's past illegal activities involving gambling and the use of prostitutes.

For Applicant

Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations

—

Denied

—

(g) association was unwitting, has ceased, or casts no doubt

—

1.e

The Applicant's failure to provide full and accurate information to the Government's agent.

For Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewNOT DELIBERATE

—

Denied

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

(g) association was unwitting, has ceased, or casts no doubt

—

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

SYNOPSIS

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES