ISCR Case 01-23615.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 01-23615.h1

grantedJun 27, 2003· Hon. Kathryn Moen Braeman· hearing

Summary

A 38-year-old defense contractor employee was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The issues stemmed from his failure to disclose three alcohol-related arrests from 1989-90 on his Security Clearance Application (SF 86). He admitted intentionally omitting this information, believing the form was for employment purposes and fearing it would affect his job prospects. He also stated he did not know the exact dates of the convictions and thought they might have been removed from his record after seven years.

The applicant had voluntarily completed an alcohol rehabilitation program in 1990 after his third arrest and attended Alcoholics Anonymous for two years, subsequently remaining alcohol-free. He now recognized his duty to disclose these arrests. Additionally, concerns were raised about his dispute with his health insurance provider regarding the use of his Social Security Number (SSN) as an identifier, though he never intended to renounce his U.S. citizenship or stop using his SSN.

The judge granted the clearance, finding that the omission was an isolated incident of poor judgment. This was mitigated by his subsequent full disclosure during an interview, his graduation from a sobriety program, and his exemplary work record, which included strong endorsements from multiple supervisors.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated that the omission of past alcohol-related arrests was an isolated incident of poor judgment.
He provided full disclosures during an investigative interview, showing willingness to correct past mistakes.
The applicant's strong work record and positive references outweighed the concerns raised by his past conduct.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
J1raisedAllegations or Admissions of Criminal Conduct

Mitigating

E2appliedThe Falsification Was an Isolated Incident, Was Not Recent, and the Individual Has Subsequently Provided Correct Information Voluntarily
E5appliedThe Individual Has Taken Positive Steps to Significantly Reduce or Eliminate Vulnerability to Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress
JfappliedThere Is Clear Evidence of Successful Rehabilitation

Key Rule Quoted

“The responsibility for producing evidence initially falls on the Government to demonstrate that it is not clearly consistent with the national interest to grant or continue Applicant's access to classified information.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 25, 2002
Answer filedNov 17, 2002Notarized response
Hearing heldMay 1, 2003Applicant represented himself
Decision dateJun 27, 2003

Cite For

Mitigation of Personal Conduct Issues Under Guideline E Due to Isolated Incidents
Successful Rehabilitation in Cases of Past Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Importance of Positive Work References 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 May 11, 2000, Applicant completed and signed a Security Clearance Application (SF 86). In response to Question 24, Applicant failed to disclose three alcohol-related incidents from the 1989-90 period in response to the question "Have you ever been charged with or convicted of any offense(s) related to alcohol or drugs?" He admitted he intentionally left this information off the SF 86 thinking that it could affect his chance of getting the job; he believed the form would be used for employment purposes by the company; he did not understand the SF 86 form was for a security clearance. Further he did not know the dates of the convictions and thought that after seven years such convictions were dropped from his driving record. He subsequently graduated from a sobriety program and has been alcohol free. He now realizes he had a duty to disclose these arrests. At the time he did not reveal the information as he did not want "any preconceived notions" going to his employer as he saw these arrests as part of his past, not part of his future. He is now married and no longer conducts himself as he did when he was single and used alcohol in the 1989-90 period. He voluntarily went through alcohol rehabilitation in 1990 to address these issues after this third alcohol-related arrest; he subsequently attended Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) for two years.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Admitted	—	(b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully (e) positive steps to reduce vulnerability to exploitation	Claimed Corrected Falsification Promptly Documented Rehabilitation Evidence
1.a.(1)	Applicant admitted he intentionally left this information off the SF 86 thinking that it could affect his chance of getting the job; he believed the form would be used for employment purposes by the company; he did not understand the SF 86 form was for a security clearance.	For Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Admitted	—	(b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully (e) positive steps to reduce vulnerability to exploitation	Claimed Corrected Falsification Promptly Documented Rehabilitation Evidence
1.a.(2)	He subsequently graduated from a sobriety program and has been alcohol free. He now realizes he had a duty to disclose these arrests.	For Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Admitted	—	(b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully (e) positive steps to reduce vulnerability to exploitation	Claimed Corrected Falsification Promptly Documented Rehabilitation Evidence
1.a.(3)	He voluntarily went through alcohol rehabilitation in 1990 to address these issues after this third alcohol-related arrest; he subsequently attended Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) for two years.	For Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Admitted	—	(b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully (e) positive steps to reduce vulnerability to exploitation	Claimed Corrected Falsification Promptly Documented Rehabilitation Evidence
1.b	Applicant had a dispute with his insurance company that provides health care benefits through his employer as the claim statements and forms contained his social security number (SSN) as an identifier. Since he lived in a mobile home park, he feared that if such mail were handled carelessly someone would be able to gain access to his SSN; and he could be subject to "identify theft." He requested that the SSN not be used as his identifier, but his company would not provide a separate identifier to him because that might cause confusion at the company. When he questioned why he had to have a SSN number, a Social Security Administration (SSA) representative explained that he needed a SSN to work in the United States (US); the representative claimed that if he did not have a SSN he would no longer be a citizen of the US and would be renouncing his citizenship; further she explained he would not get retirement benefits. He later had a conversation with a company representative (Ms. M) who told him that nothing could be done from the point of view of the company as use of the SSN was required for the company to administer the health plan. He explained to Ms. M what he had learned from SSA that to opt out of using his SSN would "in essence be renouncing his citizenship." He did not tell Ms. M that he intended to renounce his citizenship. He alluded to the possible use of a W-8 form, an Internal Revenue Form, used by persons working in the US without a SSN and explored with her the possibility of using that form. However, he never filed a W-8 form; and he never had any intention to renounce his US citizenship. He has no intent to get rid of his SSN.	For Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

1.a

On May 11, 2000, Applicant completed and signed a Security Clearance Application (SF 86). In response to Question 24, Applicant failed to disclose three alcohol-related incidents from the 1989-90 period in response to the question "Have you ever been charged with or convicted of any offense(s) related to alcohol or drugs?" He admitted he intentionally left this information off the SF 86 thinking that it could affect his chance of getting the job; he believed the form would be used for employment purposes by the company; he did not understand the SF 86 form was for a security clearance. Further he did not know the dates of the convictions and thought that after seven years such convictions were dropped from his driving record. He subsequently graduated from a sobriety program and has been alcohol free. He now realizes he had a duty to disclose these arrests. At the time he did not reveal the information as he did not want "any preconceived notions" going to his employer as he saw these arrests as part of his past, not part of his future. He is now married and no longer conducts himself as he did when he was single and used alcohol in the 1989-90 period. He voluntarily went through alcohol rehabilitation in 1990 to address these issues after this third alcohol-related arrest; he subsequently attended Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) for two years.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Admitted

—

(b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully

(e) positive steps to reduce vulnerability to exploitation

Claimed

Corrected Falsification Promptly

Documented

Rehabilitation Evidence

1.a.(1)

Applicant admitted he intentionally left this information off the SF 86 thinking that it could affect his chance of getting the job; he believed the form would be used for employment purposes by the company; he did not understand the SF 86 form was for a security clearance.

For Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Admitted

—

(b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully

(e) positive steps to reduce vulnerability to exploitation

Claimed

Corrected Falsification Promptly

Documented

Rehabilitation Evidence

1.a.(2)

He subsequently graduated from a sobriety program and has been alcohol free. He now realizes he had a duty to disclose these arrests.

For Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Admitted

—

(b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully

(e) positive steps to reduce vulnerability to exploitation

Claimed

Corrected Falsification Promptly

Documented

Rehabilitation Evidence

1.a.(3)

He voluntarily went through alcohol rehabilitation in 1990 to address these issues after this third alcohol-related arrest; he subsequently attended Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) for two years.

For Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Admitted

—

(b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully

(e) positive steps to reduce vulnerability to exploitation

Claimed

Corrected Falsification Promptly

Documented

Rehabilitation Evidence

1.b

Applicant had a dispute with his insurance company that provides health care benefits through his employer as the claim statements and forms contained his social security number (SSN) as an identifier. Since he lived in a mobile home park, he feared that if such mail were handled carelessly someone would be able to gain access to his SSN; and he could be subject to "identify theft." He requested that the SSN not be used as his identifier, but his company would not provide a separate identifier to him because that might cause confusion at the company. When he questioned why he had to have a SSN number, a Social Security Administration (SSA) representative explained that he needed a SSN to work in the United States (US); the representative claimed that if he did not have a SSN he would no longer be a citizen of the US and would be renouncing his citizenship; further she explained he would not get retirement benefits. He later had a conversation with a company representative (Ms. M) who told him that nothing could be done from the point of view of the company as use of the SSN was required for the company to administer the health plan. He explained to Ms. M what he had learned from SSA that to opt out of using his SSN would "in essence be renouncing his citizenship." He did not tell Ms. M that he intended to renounce his citizenship. He alluded to the possible use of a W-8 form, an Internal Revenue Form, used by persons working in the US without a SSN and explored with her the possibility of using that form. However, he never filed a W-8 form; and he never had any intention to renounce his US citizenship. He has no intent to get rid of his SSN.

For Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	The Government maintains security concerns over Applicant's criminal conduct in willfully falsifying his SF 86 forms by his failure to disclose the details of the 1989-90 alcohol-related incidents which raises a security concern under Title 18 United States Code Section 1001; even though he was never prosecuted under this statute or convicted, his conduct, as discussed above under personal conduct, this conduct arguably falls within that statute as his "No" answers were given "knowingly and willfully." His failure to make these disclosures raises questions about his security worthiness.	For Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.) (b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure	Documented Rehabilitation Evidence Documented No Subsequent Offenses

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

2.a

The Government maintains security concerns over Applicant's criminal conduct in willfully falsifying his SF 86 forms by his failure to disclose the details of the 1989-90 alcohol-related incidents which raises a security concern under Title 18 United States Code Section 1001; even though he was never prosecuted under this statute or convicted, his conduct, as discussed above under personal conduct, this conduct arguably falls within that statute as his "No" answers were given "knowingly and willfully." His failure to make these disclosures raises questions about his security worthiness.

For Applicant

Drug Related Criminal Charge

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)

(b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure

Documented

Rehabilitation Evidence

Documented

No Subsequent Offenses

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

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES