ISCR Case 03-05281.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 03-05281.h1

deniedOct 20, 2004· Hon. James A. Young· hearing

Summary

A 33-year-old security guard 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 applicant had a history of drug use, including cocaine from 1986-2002, crack cocaine from 1994-2002, and marijuana from 1983-2002. This included receiving treatment after a cocaine overdose and continuing use afterward, as well as another treatment in February 2002 after ingesting purchased drugs.

His criminal conduct included a 1991 conviction for attempted distribution of cocaine, an arrest in August 1990 for sodomy, and removing a computer from his workplace to sell for drugs. Furthermore, the applicant falsified material facts on his security clearance application by misleading the government about the reason he left previous employment and omitting his drug abuse over the prior seven years. He also falsified information in a sworn statement regarding the computer equipment removal.

The judge found that the applicant failed to mitigate these concerns. His long history of drug use, pattern of criminal conduct, and deliberate falsification of information on his application and in a sworn statement significantly undermined his trustworthiness and credibility, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had a long history of drug use, including cocaine and marijuana, which raised significant security concerns.
He was convicted of attempted distribution of cocaine and had a pattern of criminal conduct that undermined his trustworthiness.
The applicant deliberately falsified information on his security clearance application and in a sworn statement, which further compromised his credibility.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A8.1.2.1raisedDrug Abuse
E2.A10.1.2.1raisedCriminal Conduct - History of Criminal Activity
E2.A10.1.2.2raisedCriminal Conduct - Serious Criminal Conduct
E2.A5.1.2.2raisedPersonal Conduct - Falsification of Material Facts
E2.A10.1.2.3raisedCriminal Conduct - Falsification in Government Matters

Mitigating

E2.A8.1.3.3rejectedDrug Involvement - Intent to Abandon Drug UseThe applicant's past history of drug use and recent relapses did not support a finding of intent to abandon drug use.
E2.A10.1.3.6rejectedCriminal Conduct - Evidence of Successful RehabilitationThere was no clear evidence of successful rehabilitation from the applicant's criminal conduct.
E2.A5.1.3.3appliedPersonal Conduct - Prompt Good-faith Effort to Correct FalsificationThe applicant made a prompt effort to correct his misleading statement regarding the computer equipment.

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 issuedApr 26, 2004
Answer filedMay 4, 2004Applicant elected to have the case decided on the written record.
Hearing held—No hearing; decided on written record.
Decision dateOct 20, 2004

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Impact of Criminal Conduct on Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline J
Falsification of Information on Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E

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
3.a	Falsified material facts in his SCA by deliberately misleading the Government as to the reason he left his previous employment.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Employment History	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
3.b	Omitting reference to his abuse of drugs in the previous seven years.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
3.c	Falsified material facts in his signed, sworn statement concerning the reason he removed the computer equipment from his workplace.	For Applicant	Falsification of Employment or Other RecordsSELF-CORRECTED	—	Admitted	—	(c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances	Credited Corrected Falsification Promptly

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

3.a

Falsified material facts in his SCA by deliberately misleading the Government as to the reason he left his previous employment.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Employment History

Denied

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

—

3.b

Omitting reference to his abuse of drugs in the previous seven years.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Drug Involvement

Denied

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

—

3.c

Falsified material facts in his signed, sworn statement concerning the reason he removed the computer equipment from his workplace.

For Applicant

Falsification of Employment or Other RecordsSELF-CORRECTED

—

Admitted

—

(c) offense is minor, long ago, infrequent, or unique circumstances

Credited

Corrected Falsification Promptly

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Used cocaine from 1986-2002	Against Applicant	Cocaine	Regular	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug	—	—
1.b	Used crack cocaine from 1994-2002	For Applicant	Cocaine	Regular	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	Convicted of attempted distribution of cocaine in 1991	For Applicant	Drug Distribution or Dealing	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	Received treatment after overdosing on cocaine	For Applicant	Treatment Failure	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	Removed a computer from his workplace to sell it for more drugs	For Applicant	Drug Distribution or Dealing	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	Continued to use cocaine after being treated for an overdose	For Applicant	Cocaine	Occasional	Admitted	—	—	—
1.g	Received treatment in February 2002 after ingesting drugs he bought	For Applicant	Treatment Failure	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.h	Used marijuana from 1983-2002	Against Applicant	Marijuana	Regular	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (b) testing positive for an illegal drug	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

1.a

Used cocaine from 1986-2002

Against Applicant

Cocaine

Regular

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(b) testing positive for an illegal drug

—

1.b

Used crack cocaine from 1994-2002

For Applicant

Cocaine

Regular

Admitted

—

1.c

Convicted of attempted distribution of cocaine in 1991

For Applicant

Drug Distribution or Dealing

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

1.d

Received treatment after overdosing on cocaine

For Applicant

Treatment Failure

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

1.e

Removed a computer from his workplace to sell it for more drugs

For Applicant

Drug Distribution or Dealing

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

1.f

Continued to use cocaine after being treated for an overdose

For Applicant

Cocaine

Occasional

Admitted

—

1.g

Received treatment in February 2002 after ingesting drugs he bought

For Applicant

Treatment Failure

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

1.h

Used marijuana from 1983-2002

Against Applicant

Marijuana

Regular

Admitted

(a) any substance misuse

(b) testing positive for an illegal drug

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant was arrested in August 1990 and charged with sodomy.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Charged Not Convicted	Unknown	—	—	—
2.b	Applicant was convicted of attempted distribution of cocaine in 1991.	Against Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Convicted	Unknown	—	—	—
2.c	Applicant violated 18 U.S.C. § 1001 by deliberately falsifying material information on his SCA and statement to the DSS agent.	Against Applicant	Fraud or Deception Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant was arrested in August 1990 and charged with sodomy.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Charged Not Convicted

Unknown

—

2.b

Applicant was convicted of attempted distribution of cocaine in 1991.

Against Applicant

Drug Related Criminal Charge

Convicted

Unknown

—

2.c

Applicant violated 18 U.S.C. § 1001 by deliberately falsifying material information on his SCA and statement to the DSS agent.

Against Applicant

Fraud or Deception Criminal

Conduct No Charge

Unknown

—

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

APPEARANCES