ISCR Case 01-04395.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 01-04395.h1

deniedMay 31, 2002· Hon. Robert Robinson Gales· hearing

Summary

A 25-year-old male applicant for a SECRET security clearance was denied due to issues under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant falsified his Questionnaire for National Security Positions (SF 86) on June 10, 1999, by denying any past use of illegal substances, including marijuana, despite certifying his responses as true and accurate. This was later found to be false, as he had concealed his history of substance abuse.

In December 2001, the applicant modified his statements, admitting he deliberately withheld information about his marijuana use due to fear that his claim of a false positive drug test would not be believed. He expressed regret for his lack of candor. This conduct constituted a violation of Title 18, United States Code, § 1001, involving misrepresentation and concealment of his substance abuse history.

The denial was based on the applicant's falsification of his security clearance application, his positive marijuana test in 1998 which he claimed was a false positive without substantiation, and his admissions of drug use only after being confronted by investigators. While a mitigating condition related to personal conduct was applied, it was insufficient to overcome the disqualifying conditions.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Applicant falsified his security clearance application by denying past illegal drug use.
He tested positive for marijuana in 1998 but claimed it was a false positive, which he did not substantiate with a re-test.
His admissions of past drug use were made only after being confronted by investigators, indicating a lack of candor.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A5.1.2.2raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
E2.A5.1.2.4raisedPersonal Conduct That Increases Vulnerability to Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress
E2.A10.1.2.1raisedAllegations or Admissions of Criminal Conduct

Mitigating

E2.A5.1.3.5appliedPositive Steps to Significantly Reduce or Eliminate Vulnerability to Coercion, Exploitation, or Pressure

Key Rule Quoted

“Complete honesty and candor on the part of applicants for access to classified information is essential to make an accurate, meaningful security clearance determination.”
— Department of Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 26, 2001
Answer filedDec 21, 2001Applicant responded in writing.
Hearing held—Applicant elected to have the case decided on the written record.
Decision dateMay 31, 2002

Cite For

Falsification of Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
Criminal Conduct Related to Substance Abuse Under Guideline J
Importance of Honesty in Security Clearance Determinations

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	On June 10, 1999, Applicant completed his Questionnaire for National Security Positions (SF 86), and in response to an inquiry pertaining to ever having used a variety of illegal substances, including marijuana, Applicant responded "no." He certified that his response was true, complete, and accurate. It was false. He had lied, falsified, omitted, and concealed the relevant portion of his true history of substance abuse.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.b	In December 2001, Applicant modified his explanations and also acknowledged deliberately choosing not to admit his marijuana use because he feared his claim regarding the false test result would not be believed. He also expressed regret over not being fully candid in his response to the question.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

1.a

On June 10, 1999, Applicant completed his Questionnaire for National Security Positions (SF 86), and in response to an inquiry pertaining to ever having used a variety of illegal substances, including marijuana, Applicant responded "no." He certified that his response was true, complete, and accurate. It was false. He had lied, falsified, omitted, and concealed the relevant portion of his true history of substance abuse.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Drug Involvement

Admitted

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

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

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

—

1.b

In December 2001, Applicant modified his explanations and also acknowledged deliberately choosing not to admit his marijuana use because he feared his claim regarding the false test result would not be believed. He also expressed regret over not being fully candid in his response to the question.

Against Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE

Drug Involvement

Admitted

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

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

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

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant admitted to criminal conduct involving misrepresentation, falsification, omission, and concealment of his substance abuse history, which constitutes a violation of Title 18, United States Code, § 1001.	Against Applicant	Fraud or Deception Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant admitted to criminal conduct involving misrepresentation, falsification, omission, and concealment of his substance abuse history, which constitutes a violation of Title 18, United States Code, § 1001.

Against Applicant

Fraud or Deception Criminal

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

—

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

FOOTNOTES