Summary
The applicant, a 46-year-old defense contractor, faced security clearance denial due to a history of criminal conduct, including multiple DUI arrests and a citation for drug paraphernalia. The judge found insufficient evidence to mitigate the negative implications of the applicant's past conduct and falsifications on security clearance forms, leading to a denial of the application.
Under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline F (Financial Considerations), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: The deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification of relevant and material facts from any personnel security questionnaire, personal history statement, or similar form used to conduct investigations, determine employment qualifications, award benefits or status, determine security clearance eligibility or trustworthiness, or award fiduciary responsibilities (2.a). The deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification of relevant and material facts from any personnel security questionnaire, personal history statement, or similar form used to conduct investigations, determine employment qualifications, award benefits or status, determine security clearance eligibility or trustworthiness, or award fiduciary responsibilities (2.b). The deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification of relevant and material facts from any personnel security questionnaire, personal history statement, or similar form used to conduct investigations, determine employment qualifications, award benefits or status, determine security clearance eligibility or trustworthiness, or award fiduciary responsibilities (2.c). $547.00 is owed the apartment complex (3.a). $1,312.00 lien against the Applicant for unpaid state income taxes (3.b). $3,077.00 lien against him for unpaid income taxes (3.c). $586.88 lien for unpaid income taxes (3.d). In April 2001, the Applicant was issued a citation for possession of drug paraphernalia (1.a). In May 1991, the Applicant was charged with disorderly conduct in a public place (1.b). In October 1991, the Applicant was involved in an accident while driving while intoxicated (1.c). In October 1990, the Applicant was stopped for speeding and charged with DUI (1.d). In 1985, the Applicant was arrested for hindering a police officer (1.e). In 1979, the Applicant was convicted of "Driving Ability Impaired by Alcohol" and ordered to attend an alcohol treatment program and Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings (1.f). In October 1989, he was charged with possession of cocaine (1.g). This subparagraph was combined with Subparagraph 1.g (1.h). The Applicant was sentenced to four years in jail (suspended) as a result of his 1989 arrest for possession of controlled dangerous substance (1.i).
The judge denied the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions E2.A5.1.2.2, E2.A6.1.2.1, E2.A6.1.2.3. The judge applied mitigating conditions E2.A6.1.3.6. The decision turned on the following: The applicant had a history of multiple arrests and a suspended sentence of four years for drug possession, raising significant security concerns; The applicant failed to disclose multiple DUI arrests on his security clearance questionnaire, demonstrating a lack of candor and reliability; The applicant's financial obligations included unresolved debts and tax liens, which contributed to doubts about his judgment and trustworthiness.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant had a history of multiple arrests and a suspended sentence of four years for drug possession, raising significant security concerns.
- The applicant failed to disclose multiple DUI arrests on his security clearance questionnaire, demonstrating a lack of candor and reliability.
- The applicant's financial obligations included unresolved debts and tax liens, which contributed to doubts about his judgment and trustworthiness.
Conditions Referenced
- E2.A5.1.2.2appliedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
- E2.A6.1.2.1appliedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- E2.A6.1.2.3appliedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- E2.A6.1.2.1raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
- E2.A6.1.2.3raisedInability or Unwillingness to Satisfy Debts
- E2.A5.1.2.2raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
- E2.A5.1.2.2rejectedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
- E2.A6.1.3.6appliedThe Individual Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts
- E2.A6.1.3.6raisedThe Individual Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts
- E2.A6.1.3.6rejectedThe Individual Initiated a Good-faith Effort to Repay Overdue Creditors or Otherwise Resolve Debts
Key Rule Quoted
“"The clearly consistent standard indicates that security clearance determinations should err, if they must, on the side of denials."”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedApr 1, 2002
- Answer filedApr 22, 2002
- Hearing heldSep 5, 2002
- Decision dateDec 17, 2002
Cite For
- Denial Based on Multiple Criminal Offenses Under Guideline J
- Lack of Candor in Security Clearance Application Under Guideline E
- Financial Irresponsibility and Unresolved Debts Under Guideline F