ISCR Case 03-24638.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 03-24638.h1

grantedMar 8, 2005· Hon. Claude R. Heiny II· hearing

Summary

A 27-year-old security analyst was evaluated under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) for a security clearance. The allegations stemmed from a 1997 incident where she stole $100 from her employer. Further issues arose from her failure to disclose this theft on her 2002 security clearance application (SF-86) and her initial denial of the incident during an August 2003 interview, though she later admitted to it.

The applicant's case also noted that she had since completed her bachelor's degree and was pursuing a master's, and that family problems had been resolved. Disqualifying conditions were raised under both guidelines, but mitigating conditions were also considered.

Ultimately, the security clearance was GRANTED. The decision highlighted that the applicant admitted her past misconduct, repaid the stolen money, and apologized to her former employer. She demonstrated significant personal and professional growth, receiving strong endorsements. The theft occurred over seven years prior, and her subsequent actions indicated a commitment to honesty and integrity.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant admitted to her past misconduct and took steps to rectify it by repaying the stolen money and apologizing to her former employer.
She demonstrated significant personal and professional growth since the incident, receiving strong endorsements from supervisors and colleagues.
The theft occurred over seven years ago, and the applicant's actions indicated a commitment to honesty and integrity moving forward.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A5.1.2.2raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts
E2.A5.1.2.3raisedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information
E2.A10.1.2.1raisedAllegations or Admission of Criminal Conduct

Mitigating

E2.A5.1.3.5appliedThe Individual Has Taken Positive Steps to Significantly Reduce or Eliminate Vulnerability to Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress
E2.A10.1.3.4appliedThe Person Did Not Voluntarily Commit the Act And/or the Factors Leading to the Violation Are Not Likely to Recur

Key Rule Quoted

“Security clearances are granted only when "it is clearly consistent with the national interest to do so."”
— Executive Orders 10865 § 2 and 12968 § 3.1(b)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMay 26, 2004
Answer filedJun 14, 2004
Hearing heldOct 8, 2004
Decision dateMar 8, 2005

Cite For

Mitigating Factors Related to Long-past Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
The Importance of Rehabilitation and Community Support in Security Clearance Decisions
The Application of Mitigating Conditions in Cases of Past Personal Conduct Issues

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	In 1997, Applicant stole $100 from her employer.	For Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant did not include this incident on her 2002 security clearance application, Standard Form (SF) 86.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.c	During an August 2003 interview, she denied taking the money.	For Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewNOT DELIBERATE	—	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.d	Following the interview, she called the investigator and admitted she had taken the money.	For Applicant	Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATE	—	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official (c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern	—	—
1.e	Applicant has since completed her bachelor's degree and is working on her master's degree.	For Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	The problems with her family have been resolved.	For Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

1.a

In 1997, Applicant stole $100 from her employer.

For Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

—

1.b

Applicant did not include this incident on her 2002 security clearance application, Standard Form (SF) 86.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseNOT DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

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

(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern

—

1.c

During an August 2003 interview, she denied taking the money.

For Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewNOT DELIBERATE

—

Denied

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

(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern

—

1.d

Following the interview, she called the investigator and admitted she had taken the money.

For Applicant

Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATE

—

Denied

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

(c) credible adverse information across areas supporting a whole-person concern

—

1.e

Applicant has since completed her bachelor's degree and is working on her master's degree.

For Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

—

1.f

The problems with her family have been resolved.

For Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	In 1997, Applicant stole $100 from her employer and lied about it in two sworn statements.	For Applicant	Theft or Larceny	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	Credited Acknowledgment and Remorse Credited No Subsequent Offenses

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

2.a

In 1997, Applicant stole $100 from her employer and lied about it in two sworn statements.

For Applicant

Theft or Larceny

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

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

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

Credited

Acknowledgment and Remorse

Credited

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