ISCR Case 04-01338.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 04-01338.h1

deniedMay 18, 2006· Hon. Joseph Testan· hearing

Summary

A 25-year-old defense contractor employee was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption). The denial stemmed from a history of alcohol-related incidents and the intentional falsification of information on his security clearance application.

Specifically, the applicant intentionally provided false information to the Government on his 2003 Security Clearance Application, failing to disclose a February 2002 Driving Under the Influence (DUI) conviction. Additionally, over an approximately six-year period ending in March 2003, the applicant was cited or arrested on approximately 16 different occasions for driving-related offenses, including a DUI in February 2002 and another citation for DUI and violating a restricted driver's license in February 2003. While the applicant stated he has not consumed alcohol since February 2003 and does not intend to in the future, and his last alcohol-related incident occurred over two years prior, these mitigating factors were insufficient.

The judge determined that the intentional falsification of information and the extensive history of driving offenses, particularly alcohol-related incidents, demonstrated a lack of reliability and trustworthiness. This conduct suggested an unwillingness or inability to adhere to rules and regulations, leading to the denial of the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant intentionally provided false information on his Security Clearance Application (SCA).
The applicant's history of approximately 16 driving-related offenses reflects adversely on his judgment and reliability.
The applicant's conduct suggests he may be unwilling or unable to follow rules and regulations regarding classified information.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A5.1.2.2appliedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts From Any Personnel Security Questionnaire.
E2.A5.1.2.5appliedA Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations.
E2.A7.1.2.1raisedAlcohol-related Incidents Away From Work, Such as Driving Under the Influence, Fighting, Child or Spouse Abuse, or Other Criminal Incidents Related to Alcohol Use.

Mitigating

E2.A7.1.3.2appliedThe Problem Occurred a Number of Years Ago and There Is No Indication of a Recent Problem.
E2.A7.1.3.3appliedPositive Changes in Behavior Supportive of Sobriety.

Key Rule Quoted

“When such an individual intentionally falsifies material facts on a security clearance application, it is extremely difficult to conclude that he or she nevertheless possesses the good judgment, reliability and trustworthiness required of clearance holders.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 23, 2004
Answer filedJan 11, 2005Applicant elected to have case determined on a written record.
Hearing held—No hearing; case determined on written record.
Decision dateMay 18, 2006

Cite For

Intentional Falsification of Information on Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
Impact of a History of Alcohol-related Offenses on Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline G
The Importance of Honesty and Integrity in Security Clearance Determinations.

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
2.a	Applicant intentionally provided false information to the Government when he completed the SCA in 2003.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.b	During an approximately six year period ending in March 2003, applicant was cited and/or arrested on approximately 16 different occasions for driving-related offenses.	Against Applicant	Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations	—	Denied	(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant intentionally provided false information to the Government when he completed the SCA in 2003.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

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

—

2.b

During an approximately six year period ending in March 2003, applicant was cited and/or arrested on approximately 16 different occasions for driving-related offenses.

Against Applicant

Pattern of Dishonesty or Rule Violations

—

Denied

(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
1.a	In February 2002, applicant was arrested and charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI).	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(b) alcohol-related incident at work	—	—
1.b	Applicant was not arrested for DUI in March 2002 as alleged in the SOR.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Denied	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant was not arrested for DUI on October 31, 2002 as alleged in the SOR.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Denied	—	—	—
1.d	In February 2003, applicant was cited for DUI and for violating the terms of his restricted drivers license.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	(b) alcohol-related incident at work	—	—
1.e	Applicant's last alcohol-related incident occurred over two years ago.	For Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Admitted	—	(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse (d) completed treatment and aftercare with established abstinence/modified use	—
1.f	Applicant has made credible statements that he has not consumed alcohol since his last DUI in February 2003, and does not intend to consume it in the future.	For Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Admitted	—	(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse (d) completed treatment and aftercare with established abstinence/modified use	—
1.g	Applicant failed to disclose his February 2002 DUI conviction on his Security Clearance Application (SCA).	Against Applicant	Unspecified Alcohol Incident	Denied	(b) alcohol-related incident at work	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

1.a

In February 2002, applicant was arrested and charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI).

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

(b) alcohol-related incident at work

—

1.b

Applicant was not arrested for DUI in March 2002 as alleged in the SOR.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Denied

—

1.c

Applicant was not arrested for DUI on October 31, 2002 as alleged in the SOR.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Denied

—

1.d

In February 2003, applicant was cited for DUI and for violating the terms of his restricted drivers license.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

(b) alcohol-related incident at work

—

1.e

Applicant's last alcohol-related incident occurred over two years ago.

For Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Admitted

—

(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse

(d) completed treatment and aftercare with established abstinence/modified use

—

1.f

Applicant has made credible statements that he has not consumed alcohol since his last DUI in February 2003, and does not intend to consume it in the future.

For Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Admitted

—

(c) participating in counseling/treatment with satisfactory progress, no prior relapse

(d) completed treatment and aftercare with established abstinence/modified use

—

1.g

Applicant failed to disclose his February 2002 DUI conviction on his Security Clearance Application (SCA).

Against Applicant

Unspecified Alcohol Incident

Denied

(b) alcohol-related incident at work

—

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

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES