ISCR Case 01-24480.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 01-24480.h1

deniedJul 18, 2003· Hon. Philip S. Howe· hearing

Summary

A 47-year-old secretary for a defense contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline H (Drug Involvement), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from a history of drug use, multiple criminal convictions, and the applicant's failure to disclose this information on her security clearance application.

Specifically, the applicant did not report her drug involvement on a personnel security questionnaire submitted in April 2000. She also failed to disclose arrests for DUI in 1975, and for marijuana and alcohol possession in a public park in 1980. Her criminal history included five incidents of shoplifting between 1974 and 1988, and a 1997 conviction for simple assault. The judge noted that these falsifications on her application were violations of 18 USC 1001.

The judge determined that the applicant's admitted history of drug use and criminal convictions, coupled with her pattern of failing to disclose this information, demonstrated dishonesty and untrustworthiness. The applicant did not mitigate the disqualifying conditions, leading to the conclusion that granting a clearance was not in the national interest.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to a history of drug use and multiple criminal convictions.
The applicant failed to disclose relevant information on her security clearance application, including drug use and arrests.
The judge found a pattern of dishonesty and untrustworthiness in the applicant's conduct.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A2.2raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, Falsification or Misrepresentation of Relevant and Material Facts
E2.A2.4raisedPersonal Conduct or Concealment of Information That Increases an Individual's Vulnerability to Coercion
E2.A2.5raisedA Pattern of Dishonesty
H2.A1raisedAny Drug Abuse
H2.A2raisedIllegal Drug Possession, Including Purchase
J2.A1raisedAllegations or Admissions of Criminal Conduct
J2.A2raisedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses

Mitigating

E2.C2rejectedThe Falsification Was an Isolated Incident, Was Not Recent, and the Individual Has Subsequently Provided Correct Information VoluntarilyThe judge found that two falsifications on the same form cannot be considered isolated.
H2.E1appliedThe Drug Involvement Was Not Recent
H2.E3appliedA Demonstrated Intent Not to Abuse Any Drugs in the Future
J2.C1appliedThe Criminal Behavior Was Not Recent
J2.C6rejectedThere Is Clear Evidence of Successful RehabilitationThe judge found that the applicant's pattern of dishonesty counterbalanced any evidence of rehabilitation.

Key Rule Quoted

“"No one has a 'right' to a security clearance."”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 528 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedOct 15, 2002
Answer filedNov 1, 2002Applicant requested a decision on the written record.
Hearing held—
Decision dateJul 18, 2003

Cite For

Failure to Disclose Drug Use and Criminal History Under Guideline E
Pattern of Dishonesty Impacting Security Clearance Eligibility
Consideration of Mitigating Conditions in the Context of Past Conduct

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	Applicant failed to disclose her drug involvement on the personnel security questionnaire submitted in April 2000 in response to Question 27.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Admitted	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official (d) pattern of dishonesty, rule violations, or other untrustworthy behavior (e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation	—	—
1.b	Applicant failed to disclose the arrests for DUI in 1975 and the 1980 arrest for marijuana possession and possession of alcohol in a public park in response to Question 24 on the security clearance application form.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Admitted	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official (d) pattern of dishonesty, rule violations, or other untrustworthy behavior (e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant failed to disclose her drug involvement on the personnel security questionnaire submitted in April 2000 in response to Question 27.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Drug Involvement

Admitted

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

(d) pattern of dishonesty, rule violations, or other untrustworthy behavior

(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation

—

1.b

Applicant failed to disclose the arrests for DUI in 1975 and the 1980 arrest for marijuana possession and possession of alcohol in a public park in response to Question 24 on the security clearance application form.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Admitted

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

(d) pattern of dishonesty, rule violations, or other untrustworthy behavior

(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
2.a–2.d	4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

2.a–2.d

4 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).

For Applicant

Unspecified Drug Involvement

Unspecified

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
3.a	The applicant has a history or pattern of criminal activity that creates doubt about her judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness.	Against Applicant	Multiple Arrests Pattern	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
3.b	The applicant has committed multiple offenses, including five incidents of shoplifting from 1974 until 1988.	Against Applicant	Theft or Larceny	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
3.c	The applicant was arrested for DUI in 1975.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
3.d	The applicant was arrested for marijuana possession and alcohol possession in a public park in 1980.	Against Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
3.e	The applicant was convicted of simple assault in 1997.	Against Applicant	Assault or Battery	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
3.f	The applicant's falsifications on her security clearance applications were violations of 18 USC 1001.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
3.g	The applicant has a pattern of criminal conduct that raises security concerns.	Against Applicant	Multiple Arrests Pattern	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
3.h	The applicant failed to disclose her criminal history on her security clearance application.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

3.a

The applicant has a history or pattern of criminal activity that creates doubt about her judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness.

Against Applicant

Multiple Arrests Pattern

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

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

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

—

3.b

The applicant has committed multiple offenses, including five incidents of shoplifting from 1974 until 1988.

Against Applicant

Theft or Larceny

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

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

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

—

3.c

The applicant was arrested for DUI in 1975.

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

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

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

—

3.d

The applicant was arrested for marijuana possession and alcohol possession in a public park in 1980.

Against Applicant

Drug Related Criminal Charge

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

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

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

—

3.e

The applicant was convicted of simple assault in 1997.

Against Applicant

Assault or Battery

Convicted

Admitted

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

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

—

3.f

The applicant's falsifications on her security clearance applications were violations of 18 USC 1001.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

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

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

—

3.g

The applicant has a pattern of criminal conduct that raises security concerns.

Against Applicant

Multiple Arrests Pattern

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

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

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

—

3.h

The applicant failed to disclose her criminal history on her security clearance application.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

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

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

—

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