ISCR Case No. 02-13519.h1

ÿWPCÈ Ãqæ­áÀ樑&÷YÕS5KOYË‘B;PY+œò¸J®r°_50fIXÈ=±ÖT¢A^ùð謯 Áa¯Ëî­oAúÀŠÃ”I Þ.O&þY)¾³ce›â~‡™S7µ•ÉÄ3ÌG,E£"wHv:”:ÅÃMò™Èÿr.¥ (Áko‰"9™÷`ëÑ(7)ãy‚Š> 5‰Šz$sŸùùý[$Ê“²ÌÞí<+ Ô#de‹ÛiÌ t"ž k 2Kú1 •±< JǯùP 9ô ÌÑcXÑ5x5S³UNÿ %MNS B>U^“wŸ4£·Æ(ÿÿ$¡¡dÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜IBM Infoprint 11250(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX:web3dhrz160€€€dÿÿÿdɘØ4 3|xÝ ƒÿÿ!ÝÝÝÔ_ÔKEYWORD:€Drugs;€Personal€ConductÐ ÐDIGEST:€Applicant€has€a€history€of€use€of€illegal€substances€ (marijuana)€over€a€four-year€period€spanning€1997€and€2000,€involuntary€terminations€stemmingÐ ìì Ðfrom€inferred€judgment€lapses, €and€multiple€misstatements€and€omissions€in€his€security€clearance€applications€and€DSS€interviews€about€the€extent€of€his€drugÐ ØØ Ðuse€and€employment€terminations.€ €While€his€drug€use€is€mitigated€by€the€passage€of€time€and€demonstrated€intent€not€to€resume€marijuana€use,€neither€hisÐ Ä Ä Ðmisstatements€and€omissions€nor€his€involuntary€employment€terminations€are€under€any€of€the€pertinent€mitigation€guidelines€for€personal€conduct€and€raiseÐ ° ° Ðcontinuing€security€concerns€about€Applicant's€judgment€and€reliability.€€Clearance€is€denied.Ð œ œ ÐÔ_ ÔCASENOÔ_ Ô:€02- 13519.h1Ð ˆ ˆ ÐDATE:€01/26/2005Ð t t ÐÐ ÐÌDATE:€€January€26,€2005Ð 8 8 Ðß A€ ) ° ° x dtExŒ 2AßÐ $ $ ЀIn€re:€Ð ÐÐ ÐÌ------------------Ð Ø Ø ÐÔ_ ÔSSNÔ_ Ô:€-----------Ð Ä Ä ÐÐ ÐÌApplicant€for€Security€ClearanceÐ ˆ ˆ ÐÐ ÐÌß A€ ) ° ° x dtEx´ 2AßÐ L L ЀÔ_ ÔISCRÔ_ Ô€Case€No.€02-13519€Ð < < Ðò òÌDECISION€OF€ADMINISTRATIVE€JUDGEó óÐ Ðò òROGER€C.€WESLEYó óÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÌò òAPPEARANCESó óÐ œ œ ÐÐ ÐÌò òFOR€GOVERNMENTó óÐ ` ` " ÐStephanie€Hess,€Department€CounselÐ L L # ÐÐ ÐÌò òFOR€APPLICANTó óÐ # #& Ðò òPro€Seó óÐ ü#ü#' ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÌò òSYNOPSISó óÐ ˜(˜(, ÐÐ ÐÌApplicant€has€a€history€of€use€of€illegal€substances€(marijuana)€over€a€four-year€period€spanning€1997€and€2000,€involuntary€terminations€stemming€fromÐ \+\+/ Ðinferred€judgment€lapses, €and€multiple€misstatements€and€omissions€in€his€security€clearance€applications€and€DSS€interviews€about€the€extent€of€his€drug€useÐ H,H,0 Ðand€employment€terminations.€€While€his€drug€use€is€mitigated€by€the€passage€of€time€and€demonstrated€intent€not€to€resume€marijuana€use,€neither€hisÐ 4-4-1 Ðmisstatements€and€omissions€nor€his€involuntary€employment€terminations€are€under€any€of€the€pertinent€mitigation€guidelines€for€personal€conduct€and€raiseÐ . .2 Ðcontinuing€security€concerns€about€Applicant's€judgment€and€reliability.€€Clearance€is€denied.Ð / /3 ÐÐ ÐÌò òÓ ÓSTATEMENT€OF€CASEó óÐ Ð1Ð16 ÐÓ ÓÐ ÐÔ_ ÔÐ ÐÌOn€November€20,€2003,€the€Defense€Office€of€Hearings€and€Appeals€(DOHA),€pursuant€to€Executive€Order€10865€and€Department€of€Defense€DirectiveÐ Ä Ä Ð5220.6€(Directive),€dated€January€2,€1992,€issued€a€Statement€of€Reasons€(SOR)€to€Applicant, €which€detailed€reasons€why€DOHA€could€not€make€theÐ ° ° Ðpreliminary€affirmative€finding€under€the€Directive€that€it€is€clearly€consistent€with€the€national€interest€to€grant€or€continue€a€security€clearance€for€Applicant,Ð œ œ Ðand€recommended€referral€to€an€administrative€judge€to€determine€whether€clearance€should€be€granted,€continued,€denied€or€revoked.Ð ˆ ˆ ÐÐ ÐÌApplicant€responded€to€the€SOR€on€January€23,€2004€and€requested€a€hearing.€ €The€case€was€assigned€to€me€on€July€27,€2004,€and€was€scheduled€for€hearing€onÐ L L ÐAugust€3,€2004.€ €A€hearing€was€convened€on€August€3,€2004,€for€the€purpose€of€considering€whether€it€is€clearly€consistent€with€the€national€interest€to€grant,Ð 8 8 Ðcontinue, €deny,€or€revoke€Applicant's€security€clearance.€€At€hearing,€the€Government's€case€consisted€of€four€exhibits;€Applicant€relied€on€one€witnessÐ $ $ Ð(himself) €and€one€exhibit.€€The€transcript€(R.T.)€of€the€proceedings€was€received€on€August€10,€2004.Ð ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÌÓ Óò òSUMMARY€OF€PLEADINGSó ó.Ð ¬ ¬ ÐÓ ÓÐ ÐÐ ÐÌUnder€Guideline€H, €Applicant€is€alleged€to€have€used€marijuana€approximately€200€times€between€June€1997€and€May€2000.€€Ð ` ` ÐÐ ÐÌUnder€Guideline€E, €Applicant€is€alleged€to€have€(a)€been€denied€a€clearance€in€June€1999€with€another€agency€for€falsification€of€an€application€in€which€heÐ $ $ Ðdenied€any€marijuana€use,€(b)€been€fired€from€a€prior€defense€contractor€position€in€June€1999€for€failing€to€show€up€for€work€(ineligible€for€rehire),€(c)€beenÐ Ðfired€from€a€job€in€February€1994€for€refusing€to€identify€a€co-worker€who€falsified€a€time€card,€(d) €been€fired€from€a€job€in€August€1993€for€failing€to€report€toÐ ü ü Ðwork€for€one€week€without€notice€to€his€employer€and€(e) €falsified€his€security€clearance€application€(SF-86)€of€March€2001€by€understating€his€illegal€drug€useÐ è è Ðand€denying€he€had€ever€been€fired€from€a€job.Ð Ô Ô ÐÐ ÐÌFor€his€response€to€the€SOR, €Applicant€admitted€each€of€the€allegations€with€explanations.€€He€claimed€he€did€not€use€marijuana€200€times€despite€previouslyÐ ˜ ˜ Ðsaying€he€did€in€an€interview€in€which€he€was€confused,€intimidated€and€quite€frightened.€€He€claimed€to€have€misrepresented€his€lack€of€drug€use€in€his€JuneÐ " " Ð1999€SF-86€out€of€fear€of€losing€his€security€clearance€and€to€have€understated€his€drug€use€in€his€more€recent€March€2001€SF- 86€due€to€a€lack€of€understandingÐ p p ! Ðof€the€importance€of€telling€the€truth€about€his€drug€use.€ €Applicant€claimed€to€have€omitted€his€involuntary€job€terminations€in€1993€and€1994€due€to€his€beliefÐ \ \ " Ðthe€terminations€occurred€beyond€the€assigned€ten-year€range€in€the€SF-86€question.Ð H H # ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÌÓ Óò òFINDINGS€OF€FACTÐ ä$ä$( ÐÓ Óó óÐ ÐÐ ÐÌApplicant€is€a€34-year- old€telecommunications€technician€for€a€defense€contractor€who€seeks€a€security€clearance.€€The€allegations€covered€in€the€SOR,€andÐ ”(”(, Ðadmitted€to€by€Applicant,€are€incorporated€herein€by€reference€and€adopted€as€relevant€and€material€findings.€€Additional€findings€follow.Ð €)€)- ÐÐ ÐÌFrom€June€1997€to€about€May€2000,€Applicant€used€marijuana€approximately€200€times€(see€ex.€2;€R.T.,€at€34-35).€€He€assures€he€has€not€used€marijuana€orÐ D,D,0 Ðany€illegal€substances€since€his€last€use€in€May€2000€and€has€no€intention€of€resuming€use€in€the€future€out€of€concern€of€losing€his€job€and€clearance€(R.T., €atÐ 0-0-1 Ð49).€€€He€has€shown€reluctance€in€the€past,€however,€to€discuss€his€marijuana€use, €acknowledging€his€1997€to€2000€use€to€an€interviewing€agent€in€1999€onlyÐ . .2 Ðafter€submitting€to€a€polygraph€test€(R.T., €at€31,€47)€and€trimming€on€his€more€recent€use€acknowledgments€in€an€ensuing€DSS€interview€(see€ex.€2)€beforeÐ / /3 Ðconfirming€anew€his€use€range€and€quantity€at€the€hearing€(R.T.,€at€33-34).€€Because€of€this€historical€reluctance€to€come€forward€with€the€details€of€his€drugÐ ô/ô/4 Ðuse€and€repeated€omissions€in€his€security€clearance€applications,€his€credibility€is€open€to€question.€ €Absent€any€probative€evidence€to€counter€Applicant'sÐ à0à05 Ðdrug-free€claims,€however,€his€assurances€are€accepted.€€€Ð Ì1Ì16 ÐÐ ÐÌIn€Applicant's€initial€attempt€to€obtain€a€security€clearance€(in€June€1999),€he€was€denied€a€clearance€by€another€agency€because€he€falsified€his€securityÐ Ø Ø Ðclearance€application€by€denying€any€drug€use.€€€Applicant€attributes€his€omissions€to€concerns€about€losing€his€clearance.€ €His€assigned€reasons€for€omitting€hisÐ Ä Ä Ðdrug€use€in€this€prior€application€warrant€drawn€inferences€he€knowingly€and€willfully€falsified€the€application. €Ð ° ° ÐÐ ÐÌBetween€August€1993€and€June€1999,€Applicant€was€terminated€for€cause€from€various€employers€he€worked€for.€ €He€was€fired€from€Company€A€in€AugustÐ t t Ð1993€for€failing€to€report€to€work€for€one€week€without€notice€to€his€employer.€ €He€attributes€his€termination€to€his€youth€and€desire€for€better€employment.€€InÐ ` ` ÐFebruary€1994€he€was€terminated€from€Company€B€for€refusing€ €to€identify€a€coworker€who€had€falsified€a€time€card.€€He€had€informed€his€management€that€heÐ L L Ðdidn't€ €want€to€be€a€part€of€telling€on€a€coworker€and,€by€doing€so,€risk€retaliatory€actions€on€himself€and€his€family.€€Applicant€was€terminated€from€CompanyÐ 8 8 ÐC€in€June€1999€for€failing€to€show€up€for€work€one€day€and€failing€to€notify€his€supervisor€of€his€decision€to€work€full€time€elsewhere.€ €He€attributes€his€absenceÐ $ $ Ðto€working€two€jobs€and€failing€to€notify€his€Company€C€supervisor€of€his€conflict€with€his€second€job.€ €He€acknowledges€he€is€not€eligible€for€rehire.Ð ÐÐ ÐÌWhen€completing€his€SF-86€in€March€2001,€Applicant€(a) €understated€the€range€of€his€drug€use€€when€he€represented€he€used€marijuana€from€only€1997€to€1998Ð Ô Ô Ðand€(b) €denied€he€had€ever€been€fired€from€a€job.€€His€claims€of€confusion€and€uncertainty€over€whether€his€1993€and€1994€terminations€fell€outside€the€10-yearÐ À À Ðrange€of€inquiry€are€unpersuasive€in€light€of€his€acknowledged€concerns€about€losing€his€job€and€clearance€were€he€to€disclose€the€truth€about€his€drug€use€andÐ ¬ ¬ Ðjob€€terminations€(R.T.,€at€30).Ð ˜ ˜ ÐÐ ÐÌPrior€to€completing€an€SF-86€for€his€current€company€in€August€2003,€Applicant€ (in€June€2003)€was€Applicant€was€interviewed€by€a€DSS€agent€in€connectionÐ \ \ Ðwith€a€pending€clearance€application€for€another€company€he€was€then€employed€by€(see€ex.€2).€€In€the€signed,€sworn€statement€he€gave€to€Agent€A€afterÐ H H Ðcompleting€the€interview,€Applicant€acknowledged€using€marijuana€about€200€times,€albeit€over€a€one€year€period, €but€failed€to€correct€his€earlier€misstatementsÐ 4 4 Ðabout€his€employment€terminations.€€Whereas,€in€the€SF- 86€he€executed€in€August€2003,€he€trimmed€considerably€on€the€extent€of€his€marijuana€use€conveyedÐ Ðto€Agent€A€earlier€when€answering€question€27€(admitting€to€using€marijuana€only€several€times)€and€continued€to€deny€ever€being€fired€from€a€job.€Ð ÐÐ ÐÌApplicant€acknowledges€he€falsified€his€August€2003€SF- 86€as€well€by€understating€both€the€range€and€quantity€of€his€marijuana€use€over€a€three-year€period.Ð Ð Ð ÐAs€someone€familiar€with€the€importance€of€the€clearance€process€(having€been€recently€been€denied€a€clearance€for€lack€of€candor€in€describing€his€drug€use),Ð ¼ ¼ Ðhe€admits,€too, €to€falsely€denying€he€had€ever€been€fired€or€involuntarily€terminated€from€a€job€within€the€previous€10€years€when€answering€question€20.Ð ¨ ¨ ÐApplicant's€imputed€reasons€for€his€misstatements€are€virtually€identical€to€the€reasons€he€assigned€for€previous€misstatements€in€the€SF-86s€he€executed:Ð ” ” Ðconcern€over€losing€his€clearance€and€job.Ð € € ÐÐ ÐÌApplicant€doesn't€remember€if€he€was€ever€interviewed€again€after€completing€his€August€2003€SF-86€(R.T.,€at€43-46).€€Without€any€produced€documentationÐ D D # Ðfrom€either€Applicant€or€the€Government€that€he€was,€inferences€are€drawn€that€he€wasn't.Ð 0!0!$ ÐÐ ÐÌApplicant€is€considered€a€dependable€employee€and€an€asset€to€his€current€company€(Company€D)€by€his€project€manager€(see€ex.€A).€€His€project€managerÐ ô#ô#' Ðoffers€nothing€negative€about€Applicant€in€his€assessment€but€doesn't€indicate€any€knowledge€of€the€drug€and€falsification€issues€in€the€SOR€either.Ð à$à$( ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÌÓ Óò òPOLICIESÐ |)|)- ÐÓ Óó óÐ ÐÐ ÐÌThe€Adjudicative€Guidelines€of€the€Directive€(Change€4)€list€Guidelines€to€be€considered€by€judges€in€the€decision€making€process€covering€DOHA€cases.Ð ,- ,-1 ÐThese€revised€Guidelines€require€the€judge€to€consider€all€of€the€"Conditions€that€could€raise€a€security€concern€and€may€be€disqualifying"€(DisqualifyingÐ . .2 ÐConditions),€if€any,€and€all€of€the€"Mitigating€Conditions,"€if€any,€before€deciding€whether€or€not€a€security€clearance€should€be€granted, €continued€or€denied.Ð / /3 ÐThe€Guidelines€do€not€require€the€judge€to€assess€these€factors€exclusively€in€arriving€at€a€decision.€ €In€addition€to€the€relevant€Adjudicative€Guidelines,€judgesÐ ð/ð/4 Ðmust€take€into€account€the€pertinent€considerations€for€assessing€extenuation€and€mitigation€set€forth€in€E.2.2€of€the€Adjudicative€Process€of€Enclosure€2€of€theÐ Ü0Ü05 ÐDirective,€which€are€intended€to€assist€the€judges€in€reaching€a€fair€and€impartial€common€sense€decision.Ð È1È16 ÐÐ ÐÌò òÓ ÓDrug€Involvementó óÐ Ø Ø ÐÓ ÓÐ ÐÐ ÐÌThe€Concern: €Improper€or€illegal€involvement€with€drugs€raises€questions€regarding€an€individual's€willingness€or€ability€to€protect€classified€information.€DrugÐ ˆ ˆ Ðabuse€or€dependence€may€impair€social€or€occupational€functioning,€increasing€the€risk€of€an€unauthorized€disclosure€of€classified€information.Ð t t ÐÐ ÐÌò òDisqualifying€Conditions:ó óÐ 8 8 ÐÐ ÐÌDC€1€€Any€drug€use.Ð ü ü ÐÐ ÐÌDC€2€€ €Illegal€drug€possession,€including€cultivation,€processing,€manufacture,€purchase,€sale,€or€distribution.Ð À À ÐÐ ÐÌò òMitigating€Conditions:ó óÐ " " ÐÐ ÐÌMC€1€€€The€drug€involvement€was€not€recent.Ð H H ÐÐ ÐÌMC€3€ €A€demonstrated€intent€not€to€abuse€any€drugs€in€the€future.Ð ÐÐ ÐÌÓ Óò òPersonal€ConductÐ Ð Ð ÐÓ Óó óÐ ÐÐ ÐÌThe€Concern:€conduct€involving€questionable€judgment,€untrustworthiness,€unreliability,€lack€of€candor,€dishonesty, €or€unwillingness€to€comply€with€rules€andÐ € € Ðregulations€could€indicate€that€the€person€may€not€properly€safeguard€classified€information.Ð l l ! ÐÐ ÐÌò òDisqualifying€Conditions:ó ó€Ð 0!0!$ ÐÐ ÐÌDC€1€Reliable,€unfavorable€information€provided€by€associates, €employees,€coworkers,€neighbors,€and€other€acquaintances.Ð ø#ø#' ÐÐ ÐÌDC€2€€The€deliberate€omission,€concealment, €falsification€or€misrepresentation€of€relevant€and€material€facts€from€any€personnel€security€questionnaire,Ð ¼&¼&* Ðpersonal€history€statement€or€similar€form€used€to€conduct€investigations,€determine€employment€qualifications,€award€benefits€or€status,€Ð ¨'¨'+ Ðdetermine€security€clearance€eligibility€or€trustworthiness,€or€award€fiduciary€responsibilities.Ð ”(”(, ÐÐ ÐÌDC€3€Deliberately€providing€false€or€misleading€information€concerning€relevant€and€material€matters€to€an€investigator,€security€official,€competent€medicalÐ X+X+/ Ðauthority,€or€other€official€representative€in€connection€with€a€personnel€security€or€trustworthiness€determination.Ð D,D,0 ÐÐ ÐÌò òMitigating€conditions:ó ó€None.Ð / /3 ÐÐ ÐÌÓ Óò òBurden€of€Proofó ó€€Ð Ð1Ð16 ÐÓ ÓÐ ÐÐ ÐÌBy€virtue€of€the€precepts€framed€by€the€Directive, €a€decision€to€grant€or€continue€an€Applicant's€for€security€clearance€may€be€made€only€upon€a€thresholdÐ Ä Ä Ðfinding€that€to€do€so€is€clearly€consistent€with€the€national€interest.€€Because€the€Directive€requires€Administrative€Judges€to€make€a€common€sense€appraisal€ofÐ ° ° Ðthe€evidence€accumulated€in€the€record,€the€ultimate€determination€of€an€applicant's€eligibility€for€a€security€clearance€depends,€in€large€part, €on€the€relevanceÐ œ œ Ðand€materiality€of€that€evidence.€€As€with€all€adversary€proceedings, €the€Judge€may€draw€only€those€inferences€which€have€a€reasonable€and€logical€basis€fromÐ ˆ ˆ Ðthe€evidence€of€record.€€Conversely, €the€Judge€cannot€draw€factual€inferences€that€are€grounded€on€speculation€or€conjecture.Ð t t ÐÐ ÐÌThe€Government's€initial€burden€is€twofold: €(1)€It€must€prove€any€controverted€fact[s]€alleged€in€the€Statement€of€Reasons€and€(2)€it€must€demonstrate€that€theÐ 8 8 Ðfacts€proven€have€a€material€bearing€ €to€the€applicant's€eligibility€to€obtain€or€maintain€a€security€clearance.€€The€required€showing€of€material€bearing,€however,Ð $ $ Ðdoes€not€require€the€Government€to€affirmatively€demonstrate€that€the€applicant€has€actually€mishandled€or€abused€classified€information€before€it€can€deny€orÐ Ðrevoke€a€Ð ü ü Ðsecurity€clearance.€Rather, €consideration€must€take€account€of€cognizable€risks€that€an€applicant€may€deliberately€or€inadvertently€fail€to€safeguard€classified€information.Ð è è ÐÐ ÐÌOnce€the€Government€meets€its€initial€burden€of€proof€of€establishing€admitted€or€controverted€facts, €the€burden€of€persuasion€shifts€to€the€applicant€for€theÐ ¬ ¬ Ðpurpose€of€establishing€hisÐ ˜ ˜ Ðor€her€security€worthiness€through€evidence€of€refutation,€extenuation€or€mitigation€of€the€Government's€case.Ð " " ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÌò òÓ ÓCONCLUSIONSÐ ÐÓ Óó óÐ ÐÐ ÐÌApplicant€brings€a€praiseworthy€civilian€work€record€to€these€proceedings,€in€addition€to€a€considerable€history€of€marijuana€use,€job€terminations€and€inferredÐ Ð Ð Ðdeliberate€falsification€of€several€SF-86s€he€executed€in€1999,€2001€and€2003.€€Applicant's€historical€involvement€with€marijuana€over€a€four-year, €numerousÐ ¼ ¼ Ðjob€terminations€for€cause,€and€repeated€falsification€of€security€applications€€about€his€drug€use, €and€involuntary€employment€terminations€(only€some€of€whichÐ ¨ ¨ Ðwas€corrected€in€ensuing€DSS€interviews)€raise€security€significant€issues€his€judgment, €reliability€and€trustworthiness€required€for€eligibility€to€accessÐ ” ” Ðclassified€information.Ð € € ÐÐ ÐÌò òDrug€issuesó óÐ D D # ÐÐ ÐÌApplicant's€marijuana€use,€while€considerable€over€a€four-year€stretch,€was€never€carried€to€addictive€or€abusive€levels. €His€admitted€use€is€concentrated€over€aÐ # #& Ðfour-year€time€period€(i.e.,€June€1997€to€May€2000)€and€has€not€been€repeated€in€the€four- plus€years€that€have€since€elapsed.€Ð ô#ô#' ÐÐ ÐÌApplicant's€considerable€use€ €of€marijuana€between€1997€and€2000€are€sufficient€to€invoke€two€of€the€disqualifying€conditions€of€the€Adjudicative€GuidelinesÐ ¸&¸&* Ðfor€drugs,€i.e.,€DC€1€ (any€drug€abuse)€and€DC€2€(illegal€drug€possession,€including€cultivation,€processing,€manufacture,€purchase,€sale€or€distribution).Ð ¤'¤'+ ÐÐ ÐÌBut€misconduct€predictions,€generally,€may€not€be€based€on€supposition€or€suspicion.€€See€ISCR€Case€No.€01-26893€(October€2002);€ISCR€Case€No.€97-0356Ð h*h*. Ð(April1998).€€The€Appeal€Board€has€consistently€held€that€an€unfavorable€credibility€determination€concerning€an€applicant€is€not€a€substitute€for€recordÐ T+T+/ Ðevidence€that€the€applicant€used€marijuana€since€his€last€recorded€use,€or€based€on€his€past€use€is€likely€to€resume€usage€in€the€future.€ €See€ISCR€Case€No.Ð @,@,0 Ð02-08032€(May€2004). €Based€on€his€own€testimony€and€the€absence€of€any€probative€evidence€of€recurrent€drug€use€since€May€2000,€Applicant€may€invoke€MCÐ ,-,-1 Ð1€ (non€recency€of€the€drug€involvement)€and€MC€3€(demonstrated€intent€not€to€abuse€any€drugs€in€the€future).€€While€Applicant's€considerable€€marijuana€useÐ . .2 Ðover€a€four-year€span€raises€some€questions€over€the€strength€of€his€avoidance€assurances, €it€is€not€enough€to€prevent€Applicant's€successful€mitigation€of€the€issue.Ð / /3 ÐÐ ÐÌApplicant's€assurances€that€his€marijuana€involvement€is€a€thing€of€the€past€are€entitled€to€acceptance€based€on€the€limited€concentration€of€his€marijuana€use€inÐ È1È16 Ðthe€past€(spread€over€a€four-year€period)€and€the€absence€of€any€drug€activity€attributed€to€him€over€the€past€four€years. €Considering€the€all€of€the€developedÐ Ðevidence€of€record,€Applicant€mitigates€security€concerns€associated€with€his€recurrent€use€and€possession€of€marijuana.€ €Favorable€conclusions€warrant€withÐ ìì Ðrespect€to€sub-paragraph€1.a€of€Guideline€H.€ò òó óÐ Ø Ø ÐÐ ÐÌò òPersonal€conduct€issuesó óÐ œ œ ÐÐ ÐÌPotentially€serious€and€difficult€ €to€reconcile€with€the€trust€and€reliability€requirements€for€holding€a€security€clearance€are€the€timing€and€circumstances€ofÐ ` ` ÐApplicant's€repeated€drug€use€omissions€in€each€of€his€SF-86s,€as€well€as€in€his€DSS€interviews€that€followed€his€2000€denial€of€a€security€clearance.€€So€muchÐ L L Ðtrust€is€imposed€on€persons€cleared€to€see€classified€information€that€lapses€in€candor€become€difficult€to€excuse€or€mitigate.€Ð 8 8 ÐÐ ÐÌBy€deliberately€understating€his€past€marijuana€use€in€each€of€his€clearance€applications€and€ensuing€DSS€interviews€before€he€was€confronted€following€aÐ ü ü Ðpolygraph€test, €Applicant€concealed€materially€important€background€information€needed€for€the€government€to€properly€process€and€evaluate€his€securityÐ è è Ðclearance.€ €He€compounds€his€drug€use€understatements€with€misstatements€about€the€circumstances€of€his€job€separations.€€His€collective€omissions€areÐ Ô Ô Ðattributable€to€concerns€about€how€disclosure€of€the€adverse€information€would€impact€on€his€employment€and€clearance,€reasons€that€the€Appeal€Board€hasÐ À À Ðconsistently€held€to€be€insufficient€to€avert€drawn€conclusions€of€knowing€and€wilful€concealment.€ €Applicant's€omissions€invite€application€of€DisqualifyingÐ ¬ ¬ ÐConditions€(DC)€for€personal€conduct€of€the€Adjudicative€Guidelines:€DC€2€ (falsification€of€a€security€questionnaire)€and€DC€3€(providing€false€information€toÐ ˜ ˜ Ðan€investigator).Ð " " ÐÐ ÐÌò òó óMitigation€is€difficult€to€credit€Applicant€with,€€since€he€failed€to€take€advantage€of€the€first€obvious€opportunities€to€correct€his€earlier€SF- 86€omissions€beforeÐ H H Ðbeing€confronted€and€continued€to€understate€his€marijuana€use,€as€well€as€conceal€his€involuntary€employment€terminations, €in€his€most€recent€clearanceÐ 4 4 Ðapplications€without€making€the€necessary€prompt,€good€faith€corrections.€ €Not€only€has€the€Appeal€Board€found€the€use€of€Mitigating€Condition€(MC)€2€of€theÐ ÐAdjudicative€Guidelines€for€personal€conduct€(isolated, €corrected€falsification)€to€be€unavailable€to€applicants€seeking€mitigation€by€treating€the€omission€asÐ Ðisolated, €but€it€has€denied€applicants€availability€of€MC€3€(prompt,€good€faith€disclosure)€as€well€in€circumstances€(as€here)€where€the€applicant€has€failed€toÐ ø ø Ðtake€advantage€of€an€earlier€DSS€interview€opportunity,€or€has€compounded€previously€corrected€omissions€with€new€omissions.€€Compare€ISCR€Case€No.Ð ä ä Ð97-0289€(January€1998)€with€DISCR€Case€No.€93-1390€(January€1995).€€Applicant,€accordingly,€may€not€take€advantage€of€either€MC€2€(isolated€omissions) €orÐ Ð Ð ÐMC€3€(prompt,€good€faith€correction€of€the€falsification)€of€the€Adjudicative€Guidelines€for€personal€conduct.Ð ¼ ¼ ÐÐ ÐÌApplicant's€involuntary€job€terminations€do€indicate€some€judgment€lapse€and€unreliability€about€exercising€responsibility€and€accountability€in€a€job€setting.Ð € € ÐDC€1€(reliable,€unfavorable€information)€of€the€Guidelines€for€personal€conduct€have€some€application€to€the€facts€of€this€case.€Considered€alone, €they€might€beÐ l l ! Ðmitigated€by€the€strong€work€reference€he€received€from€his€current€supervisor.€€When€appraised€together€with€his€past€SF- 86€and€interview€misstatements,Ð X X " Ðthough,€they€cannot€mitigate€the€numerous€judgment€lapses€reflected€in€the€circumstances€of€his€terminations€and€ €misstatements€about€his€drug€use€andÐ D D # Ðterminations€for€cause.€ €Unfavorable€conclusions€warrant€with€respect€to€subparagraphs€2.a€through€2.f€of€Guideline€E.Ð 0!0!$ ÐÐ ÐÌConsidering€all€of€the€evidence€produced€in€this€record€and€the€available€guidelines€in€the€Directive€(inclusive€of€the€E.2.2€factors),€unfavorable€conclusionsÐ ô#ô#' Ðwarrant€with€respect€to€sub-paras.€1.a€through€1.d€of€Guideline€E.Ð à$à$( ÐÐ ÐÌIn€reaching€my€decision, €I€have€considered€the€evidence€as€a€whole,€including€each€of€the€E€2.2€factors€enumerated€in€the€Adjudicative€Guidelines€of€the€Directive.Ð ¤'¤'+ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÌÓ Óò òFORMAL€FINDINGSó óÐ @,@,0 ÐÓ ÓÐ ÐÐ ÐÌIn€reviewing€the€allegations€of€the€SOR€and€ensuing€conclusions€reached€in€the€context€of€the€FINDINGS€OF€FACT,€CONCLUSIONS,€CONDITIONS, €and€theÐ ð/ð/4 Ðfactors€listed€above,€this€Administrative€Judge€makes€the€following€FORMAL€FINDINGS:Ð Ü0Ü05 ÐÐ È1È16 ÐÌGUIDELINE€H€(DRUGS):€€€€FOR€APPLICANTÐ ìì ÐÐ ÐÌSub-para.€1.a:€€€€€FOR€APPLICANTÐ ° ° ÐÐ ÐÌGUIDELINE€E€(PERSONAL€CONDUCT):€€AGAINST€APPLICANTÐ t t ÐÐ ÐÌSub-para.€2.a:€€€€€AGAINST€APPLICANTÐ 8 8 ÐSub-para.€2.b:€€€€€AGAINST€APPLICANTÐ $ $ ÐSub-para.€2.c:€€€€€AGAINST€APPLICANTÐ ÐSub-para.€2.d:€€€€ €AGAINST€APPLICANTÐ ü ü ÐSub-para.€2.e:€€€€€AGAINST€APPLICANTÐ è è ÐSub-para.€2.f:€€€€€AGAINST€APPLICANTÐ Ô Ô ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÌò òÓ ÓDECISIONÐ p p ÐÓ Óó óÐ ÐÐ ÐÌIn€light€of€all€the€circumstances€presented€by€the€record€in€this€case, €it€is€not€clearly€consistent€with€the€national€interest€to€grant€or€continue€Applicant's€securityÐ Ðclearance.€€Clearance€is€denied.Ð ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÌÓ ÓRoger€C.€WesleyÐ € € ÐÓ ÓÌÓ ÓAdministrative€JudgeÐ X X " ÐÓ Ó̀РÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÐ Ð

FOOTNOTES