ISCR Case 96-0452.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 96-0452.h1

deniedJan 3, 1997· Hon. Richard A. Cefola· hearing

Summary

A 32-year-old defense contractor with a secret security clearance was denied continued access due to concerns under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), H (Drug Involvement), and J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant's past drug use, specifically cocaine on two occasions, was considered isolated. However, his repeated lack of candor regarding this history and related criminal charges was a significant factor in the denial.

The applicant failed to disclose a 1993 citation for Criminal Property Damage and his cocaine use from the mid-1980s on his September 1993 National Agency Questionnaire. He also knowingly and willfully omitted his past drug abuse, a drug-related arrest, and treatment for Acute Cocaine Intoxication and Drug Induced Psychosis from sworn statements in October 1995 and May 1996. These omissions constituted violations of 18 U.S.C. Section 1001.

While the government did not demonstrate a lack of candor with his Facility Security Officer regarding June 1995 charges, the applicant's overall pattern of misrepresentation about his drug involvement and criminal conduct, including a positive test for cocaine and opiates in 1995, led to the denial. The decision emphasized that his past personal and criminal conduct remained of present security significance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant was less than candid about his past drug involvement on his National Agency Questionnaire (NAQ).
The applicant failed to correct falsehoods regarding his drug use in subsequent sworn statements.
The applicant's past personal conduct and related criminal conduct were of present security significance.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.a.raisedDeliberate Omission, Concealment, or Falsification of Relevant and Material Facts From Any Personnel Security Questionnaire.
E2.b.raisedDeliberate Omission of Past Drug Abuse on the NAQ.
J3.a.raisedAny Criminal Conduct, Regardless of Whether the Person Was Formally Charged.

Mitigating

H2.appliedThe Drug Involvement Was an Isolated or Infrequent Event.
E2.c.rejectedThe Applicant Was Candid with His Facility Security Officer Regarding the Status of His June 1995 Charges.
J2.notedNone.

Key Rule Quoted

“Each clearance decision must be a fair and impartial common sense determination based upon consideration of all the relevant and material information and the pertinent criteria and adjudication policy in enclosure 2.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 26, 1996
Answer filedAug 19, 1996
Hearing held—Determined on a written record in lieu of a hearing.
Decision dateJan 3, 1997

Cite For

Lack of Candor in Security Clearance Applications Under Guideline E
Impact of Past Drug Involvement on Security Clearance Under Guideline H
Significance of Criminal Conduct in Security Clearance Determinations Under Guideline J

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	In answering question 18.a. on his September 1993 National Agency Questionnaire (NAQ), the Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he was cited in April of that year for Criminal Property Damage.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.b	In answering question 20.a. on his September 1993 NAQ, the Applicant again knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he had used cocaine in "the mid 1980's".	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.c	The Government has failed to demonstrate that the Applicant was less than candid with his Facility Security Officer regarding the status of his June 1995 charges.	For Applicant	Lack of Candor in Interview	—	Unknown	—	—	—
2.d	In a signed, sworn statement, executed by the Applicant on October 19, 1995, the Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose his past drug abuse, his drug related arrest, and his treatment for his drug abuse.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—
2.e	In a second signed, sworn statement, executed by the Applicant on May 13, 1996, the Applicant again knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose his past drug abuse, his drug related arrest, and his treatment for his drug abuse.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Other	Denied	(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

In answering question 18.a. on his September 1993 National Agency Questionnaire (NAQ), the Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he was cited in April of that year for Criminal Property Damage.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

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

—

2.b

In answering question 20.a. on his September 1993 NAQ, the Applicant again knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose that he had used cocaine in "the mid 1980's".

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

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

—

2.c

The Government has failed to demonstrate that the Applicant was less than candid with his Facility Security Officer regarding the status of his June 1995 charges.

For Applicant

Lack of Candor in Interview

—

Unknown

—

2.d

In a signed, sworn statement, executed by the Applicant on October 19, 1995, the Applicant knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose his past drug abuse, his drug related arrest, and his treatment for his drug abuse.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

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

—

2.e

In a second signed, sworn statement, executed by the Applicant on May 13, 1996, the Applicant again knowingly and wilfully failed to disclose his past drug abuse, his drug related arrest, and his treatment for his drug abuse.

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Other

Denied

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

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	The Applicant used cocaine on two occasions.	For Applicant	CocaineWHILE CLEARED	Experimental	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	The Applicant used cocaine on two occasions.	For Applicant	CocaineWHILE CLEARED	Experimental	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	The Applicant received treatment from June 16~18, 1995, for a condition diagnosed as Acute Cocaine Intoxication and Drug Induced Psychosis.	For Applicant	Treatment FailureWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	The Applicant tested positive for cocaine and opiates the day of his admission.	For Applicant	Drug Test FailureWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e–3.b	10 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (7 against, 3 for the applicant). (low confidence)	Mixed	Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED	Unspecified		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

1.a

The Applicant used cocaine on two occasions.

For Applicant

CocaineWHILE CLEARED

Experimental

Admitted

—

1.b

The Applicant used cocaine on two occasions.

For Applicant

CocaineWHILE CLEARED

Experimental

Admitted

—

1.c

The Applicant received treatment from June 16~18, 1995, for a condition diagnosed as Acute Cocaine Intoxication and Drug Induced Psychosis.

For Applicant

Treatment FailureWHILE CLEARED

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

1.d

The Applicant tested positive for cocaine and opiates the day of his admission.

For Applicant

Drug Test FailureWHILE CLEARED

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

1.e–3.b

10 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (7 against, 3 for the applicant). (low confidence)

Mixed

Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED

Unspecified

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
3.a	The conduct which led to the Applicant's citation in 1993 and his arrest in 1995, constituted criminal conduct.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Unknown	—	—	—
3.b	The Applicant violated the provisions of 18 U.S.C. Section 1001, when he failed to disclose his 1993 citation and his past drug abuse on his 1993 NAQ. He further violated the provisions of the same federal code section when he failed to disclose his past drug abuse, his drug related arrest, and his treatment for his drug abuse in his October 1995 and March 1996 sworn statements.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

3.a

The conduct which led to the Applicant's citation in 1993 and his arrest in 1995, constituted criminal conduct.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Unknown

—

3.b

The Applicant violated the provisions of 18 U.S.C. Section 1001, when he failed to disclose his 1993 citation and his past drug abuse on his 1993 NAQ. He further violated the provisions of the same federal code section when he failed to disclose his past drug abuse, his drug related arrest, and his treatment for his drug abuse in his October 1995 and March 1996 sworn statements.

Against Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

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

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES