Summary
A 29-year-old unmarried claims processor for a defense contractor was granted a security clearance for an ADP I/II/III position despite concerns under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), F (Financial Considerations), H (Drug Involvement), and J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant had a history of prescription drug addiction, financial delinquency, and criminal conduct.
Specifically, the applicant was addicted to prescription painkillers and was charged with obtaining prescription drugs by fraud and deception in March 2001, leading to a misdemeanor conviction in December 2001. She received a conditional discharge with nine months probation, 30 hours of community service, and a $50 fine, which she successfully completed. In July 2001, she was charged with stealing a physician's prescription pad and writing herself prescriptions, resulting in a conviction in August 2002 and 12 months probation, also successfully completed. Additionally, she failed to fully disclose these charges on a Questionnaire for Public Trust Positions (QPT) in October 2004 and in a subsequent statement to a government investigator in March 2005, only disclosing the July 2001 theft charge. Her financial issues included outstanding debts for a medical bill ($1,379), a returned check ($53.21), a clothing store credit card ($636), a telephone bill ($112), and another purchase ($107).
The judge found that the applicant had mitigated these concerns. She demonstrated a significant period of sobriety from prescription drugs since 2003, showed a commitment to repaying her delinquent debts with a plan to address them, and had a positive employment history with favorable supervisor evaluations indicating reliability and trustworthiness.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- The applicant demonstrated a significant period of sobriety from prescription drugs since 2003.
- She has shown a commitment to repaying her delinquent debts and has a plan to address them.
- The applicant's employment history and positive evaluations from supervisors indicated her reliability and trustworthiness.
Conditions Referenced
- E2.A6.1.2.1raisedDC 1A history of not meeting financial obligations.
- E2.A6.1.2.3raisedDC 3Inability or unwillingness to satisfy debts.
- E2.A8.1.2.1raisedDC 1Any drug abuse.
- E2.A8.1.2.3raisedDC 3Diagnosis by a credentialed medical professional, a physician in this case, of drug dependence.
- E2.A10.1.2.1raisedDC 1Allegations or admissions of criminal conduct, regardless of whether the person was formally charged.
- E2.A10.1.2.2raisedDC 2A single serious crime or multiple lesser offenses.
- E2.A6.1.3.3appliedMC 3The conditions that resulted in the behavior were largely beyond the person's control.
- E2.A6.1.3.6appliedMC 6The person initiated a good-faith effort to repay overdue creditors or otherwise resolve debts.
- E2.A8.1.3.1appliedMC 1The drug involvement was not recent.
- E2.A8.1.3.3appliedMC 3A demonstrated intent not to abuse drugs in the future.
- E2.A8.1.3.4appliedMC 4Satisfactory completion of a prescribed drug treatment program.
- E2.A5.1.3.1appliedMC 1The applicant's disclosures were reasonable and did not indicate intent to mislead.
Key Rule Quoted
“The standard that must be met for . . . assignment to sensitive duties is that, based on all available information, the person's loyalty, reliability, and trustworthiness are such that . . . assigning the person to sensitive duties is clearly consistent with the interests of national security.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedAug 25, 2006
- Answer filedSep 22, 2006
- Hearing heldFeb 1, 2007
- Decision dateMar 30, 2007
Cite For
- Mitigation of Financial Considerations Due to Medical Issues
- Successful Rehabilitation From Drug Addiction
- Reasonable Disclosure of Criminal History in Security Clearance Applications