ISCR Case 01-22111.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 01-22111.h1

deniedSep 17, 2002· Hon. Paul J. Mason· hearing

Summary

A 36-year-old assembler for a defense contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from a history of criminal charges and, more significantly, intentional falsification of information on his security clearance application.

Specifically, the applicant intentionally concealed material information from his EPSQ in April 1999, falsified answers to six questions on the form, and did not disclose a drug-related military arrest until a sworn statement in June 2000. He also failed to disclose financial judgments until confronted. This deceptive behavior was further evidenced by his admission to driving on altered tags and a suspended license in April 2001.

Earlier criminal conduct included an April 1997 arrest for possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia, and July 1991 charges for battery on a police officer, resisting arrest, trespassing, disturbing the peace, and criminal damage to property. Despite the passage of time since some of these incidents, the applicant's recent deceptive behavior and failure to voluntarily disclose adverse information ultimately led to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant's intentional alteration of automobile tags in April 2001 demonstrated deceptive behavior.
The applicant concealed material information from his security clearance application, undermining his trustworthiness.
The applicant's recent criminal conduct and lack of voluntary disclosure of adverse information disqualified him from receiving a security clearance.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

JDC 1raisedAllegations or Admission of Criminal Conduct, Regardless of Whether the Person Was Formally Charged
JDC 2raisedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Crimes
EDC 2raisedThe Deliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts From Any Personnel Security Questionnaire,...to...determine Security Eligibility or Trustworthiness....

Key Rule Quoted

“The desire to improve the chances of employment does not excuse the intentional concealment of relevant and material information because an applicant is obligated to be truthful during all phases of the security investigation.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMay 31, 2002
Answer filedJun 27, 2002Applicant elected to have the case decided on a written record.
Hearing held—No hearing; decision based on written record.
Decision dateSep 17, 2002

Cite For

Disqualifying Conditions Under Guideline J for Criminal Conduct
Disqualifying Conditions Under Guideline E for Personal Conduct
Impact of Intentional Falsification on 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	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant intentionally concealed material information from his EPSQ in April 1999.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Admitted	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.b	Applicant falsified his answers to six questions on the EPSQ.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Admitted	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.c	Applicant did not disclose the adverse information about his drug-related arrest in the military until his sworn statement in June 2000.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Admitted	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.d	Applicant did not disclose financial judgments until confronted with the information.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Financial	Admitted	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.e	Applicant's deceptive behavior in 1999 and 2001 disqualifies him from security clearance approval.	Against Applicant	Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule ViolationsFOUND DELIBERATE	—	Admitted	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.f–2.g	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)	Against Applicant		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant intentionally concealed material information from his EPSQ in April 1999.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Admitted

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

—

2.b

Applicant falsified his answers to six questions on the EPSQ.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Admitted

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

—

2.c

Applicant did not disclose the adverse information about his drug-related arrest in the military until his sworn statement in June 2000.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Admitted

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

—

2.d

Applicant did not disclose financial judgments until confronted with the information.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Financial

Admitted

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

—

2.e

Applicant's deceptive behavior in 1999 and 2001 disqualifies him from security clearance approval.

Against Applicant

Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule ViolationsFOUND DELIBERATE

—

Admitted

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

—

2.f–2.g

2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)

Against Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant admitted driving on altered tags and a suspended license.	Against Applicant	Traffic Offense Pattern	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
1.b	Applicant admitted driving on a suspended license.	Against Applicant	Traffic Offense Pattern	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
1.c	On approximately April 18, 1997, Applicant was arrested for possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia.	For Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
1.d	On July 6, 1991, Applicant was charged with battery on a police officer, resisting, interference, and/or obstruction of a police officer, trespassing, disturbing the peace by intoxication, and simple criminal damage to property.	For Applicant	Assault or Battery	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant admitted driving on altered tags and a suspended license.

Against Applicant

Traffic Offense Pattern

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

—

1.b

Applicant admitted driving on a suspended license.

Against Applicant

Traffic Offense Pattern

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

—

1.c

On approximately April 18, 1997, Applicant was arrested for possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia.

For Applicant

Drug Related Criminal Charge

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

—

1.d

On July 6, 1991, Applicant was charged with battery on a police officer, resisting, interference, and/or obstruction of a police officer, trespassing, disturbing the peace by intoxication, and simple criminal damage to property.

For Applicant

Assault or Battery

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

—

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

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES