Summary
A 59-year-old defense contractor was denied retention of his security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from deliberate falsifications on his security clearance application regarding his arrest history.
Specifically, the applicant was arrested on February 1, 1997, for Driving Under the Influence of Intoxicating Liquor (a misdemeanor) and No Permit to Carry (a felony). Despite this, he answered "NO" to a question asking if he had ever been charged with or convicted of any alcohol or drug-related offenses. The judge found that the applicant intentionally falsified material aspects of his personal background during the screening process by deliberately omitting, concealing, or falsifying relevant facts about his criminal conduct.
The judge determined that the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence of rehabilitation or reform to mitigate the concerns raised by his criminal conduct and dishonesty, leading to the denial of his security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant deliberately falsified material aspects of his personal background during the clearance screening process.
- The applicant's criminal history included a felony charge that he failed to disclose on his application.
- The applicant did not provide sufficient evidence of rehabilitation or reform to mitigate the concerns raised by his conduct.
Conditions Referenced
- J.1raisedCriminal Conduct - Allegations or Admissions of Criminal Conduct, Regardless of Whether the Person Was Formally Charged.
- E.2raisedPersonal Conduct - the Deliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts From Any Personnel Security Questionnaire.
- J.6rejectedCriminal Conduct - There Is Clear Evidence of Successful Rehabilitation.The applicant did not demonstrate sufficient evidence of rehabilitation.
- E.2notedPersonal Conduct - None Applicable.
Key Rule Quoted
“The adjudicative process is an examination of a sufficient period of a person's life to make an affirmative determination that the person is an acceptable security risk.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedSep 15, 2003
- Answer filedOct 11, 2003Applicant elected to have the case determined on a written record.
- Hearing held—No hearing; case determined on written record.
- Decision dateFeb 12, 2004
Cite For
- Deliberate Falsification of Information on Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
- Criminal Conduct and Its Impact on Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline J
- Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation as a Mitigating Factor in Security Clearance Cases.