ISCR Case 97-0603.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 97-0603.h1

deniedFeb 10, 1998· Hon. John Grattan Metz, Jr.· hearing

Summary

A 41-year-old defense contractor employee sought to retain his security clearance, which was ultimately denied. The denial was based on Guideline D (Sexual Behavior), Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline H (Drug Involvement), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant had a history of drug abuse and multiple instances of falsifying security questionnaires and sworn statements.

Specifically, the applicant falsified a National Agency Questionnaire in 1993, a Questionnaire for National Security Positions in 1996, and sworn statements to the Defense Investigative Service in May 1997, all concerning his drug use history. He initially understated his marijuana use, claiming only ten uses in a specific period, and denied using drugs while holding a clearance. It was not until confronted with the prospect of a polygraph examination in July 1997 that he fully disclosed the extent of his drug use, admitting to using marijuana up to three times per week from approximately 1992 to July 1996. He also tested positive for marijuana and was diagnosed with cannabis dependence.

Despite demonstrating significant recovery and involvement in Narcotics Anonymous, the judge denied the application. The decision cited the applicant's repeated falsification of material facts, his drug abuse history, and the implications for his trustworthiness and reliability.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant falsified multiple security questionnaires regarding his drug use history.
The applicant's drug abuse history raised significant concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.
The applicant's prior conduct indicated a willingness to conceal material facts from the government.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 24 (E2)raisedPersonal Conduct
AG ¶ 30 (J1)raisedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 25 (H1)raisedDrug Involvement

Mitigating

AG ¶ 26 (H3)rejectedDrug InvolvementThe applicant's drug involvement was not recent, but the judge found the severity of past conduct outweighed this factor.
AG ¶ 26 (H4)rejectedDrug InvolvementThe applicant's participation in Narcotics Anonymous was noted, but did not meet the formal treatment program criteria.
AG ¶ 17 (E2)rejectedPersonal ConductThe applicant's demonstrated intent not to engage in future misconduct was insufficient to mitigate the falsifications.
AG ¶ 17 (J2)rejectedCriminal ConductThe applicant's history of criminal conduct was significant and not mitigated by his current behavior.

Key Rule Quoted

“"A person who seeks access to classified information enters into a fiduciary relationship with the Government predicated upon trust and confidence."”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 531 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 5, 1997
Answer filedNov 17, 1997Applicant requested a hearing.
Hearing heldJan 8, 1998Hearing conducted with multiple witnesses.
Decision dateFeb 10, 1998

Cite For

Falsification of Security Questionnaires Under Guideline E
Drug Involvement and Its Implications Under Guideline H
Impact of Past Criminal Conduct on Security Clearance 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	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶13)	Mitigating applied (¶14)	Mitigation
1.a–1.g	7 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (rulings shown). (low confidence)	Mixed			—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶13)

Mitigating applied (¶14)

Mitigation

1.a–1.g

7 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (rulings shown). (low confidence)

Mixed

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	On 12 July 1993, Applicant falsified a National Agency Questionnaire (NAQ)(DD Form 398-2) when he answered "no" to questions designed to elicit his drug abuse history.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Admitted	—	—	—
2.b	On 23 October 1996, Applicant falsified a Questionnaire for National Security Positions (QNSP)(SF 86) when he stated that he had only used marijuana ten times between June and July 1996, and had never used drugs while possessing a security clearance.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Admitted	—	—	—
2.c	On 14 May 1997, Applicant falsified a sworn statement to the Defense Investigative Service (DIS) when he stated that he had only used marijuana ten times between early June 1996 and 4 July 1996, and at no time before or after these dates.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Admitted	—	—	—
2.d	On 23 May 1997, Applicant again falsified a sworn statement to the DIS when he admitted using marijuana up to three times per week from approximately 1992 to 4 July 1996, but denied using marijuana anytime from 1978 to 1992.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Admitted	—	—	—
2.e	Not until Applicant was confronted with the prospect of a polygraph examination on 9 July 1997, did Applicant fully disclose the extent of his drug use.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

On 12 July 1993, Applicant falsified a National Agency Questionnaire (NAQ)(DD Form 398-2) when he answered "no" to questions designed to elicit his drug abuse history.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Drug Involvement

Admitted

—

2.b

On 23 October 1996, Applicant falsified a Questionnaire for National Security Positions (QNSP)(SF 86) when he stated that he had only used marijuana ten times between June and July 1996, and had never used drugs while possessing a security clearance.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Drug Involvement

Admitted

—

2.c

On 14 May 1997, Applicant falsified a sworn statement to the Defense Investigative Service (DIS) when he stated that he had only used marijuana ten times between early June 1996 and 4 July 1996, and at no time before or after these dates.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Drug Involvement

Admitted

—

2.d

On 23 May 1997, Applicant again falsified a sworn statement to the DIS when he admitted using marijuana up to three times per week from approximately 1992 to 4 July 1996, but denied using marijuana anytime from 1978 to 1992.

Against Applicant

Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE

Drug Involvement

Admitted

—

2.e

Not until Applicant was confronted with the prospect of a polygraph examination on 9 July 1997, did Applicant fully disclose the extent of his drug use.

Against Applicant

Lack of Candor in InterviewFOUND DELIBERATE

Drug Involvement

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	The applicant tested positive for marijuana during a drug test.	For Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	The applicant was diagnosed with cannabis dependence by a licensed psychologist.	For Applicant	Drug Diagnosed DisorderWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Admitted	—	—	—
1.c	The applicant falsified a Questionnaire for National Security Positions regarding his drug use.	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED	Unspecified	Admitted	—	—	—
1.d	The applicant falsified a sworn statement to the Defense Investigative Service regarding his drug use.	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED	Unspecified	Admitted	—	—	—
1.e	The applicant admitted to using marijuana up to three times per week from approximately 1992 to July 1996.	For Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Frequent	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	The applicant possessed a smoking pipe and had thoughts of possibly using marijuana with it.	For Applicant	Stated Intent to Use AgainWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Denied	—	—	—
1.g	The applicant failed to disclose his drug use history until confronted with a polygraph examination.	For Applicant	Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED	Unspecified	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Substance / event

Use level

Response

Disqualifying (¶25)

Mitigating applied (¶26)

Mitigation

1.a

The applicant tested positive for marijuana during a drug test.

For Applicant

MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED

Regular

Admitted

—

1.b

The applicant was diagnosed with cannabis dependence by a licensed psychologist.

For Applicant

Drug Diagnosed DisorderWHILE CLEARED

Not Applicable

Admitted

—

1.c

The applicant falsified a Questionnaire for National Security Positions regarding his drug use.

For Applicant

Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED

Unspecified

Admitted

—

1.d

The applicant falsified a sworn statement to the Defense Investigative Service regarding his drug use.

For Applicant

Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED

Unspecified

Admitted

—

1.e

The applicant admitted to using marijuana up to three times per week from approximately 1992 to July 1996.

For Applicant

MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED

Frequent

Admitted

—

1.f

The applicant possessed a smoking pipe and had thoughts of possibly using marijuana with it.

For Applicant

Stated Intent to Use AgainWHILE CLEARED

Not Applicable

Denied

—

1.g

The applicant failed to disclose his drug use history until confronted with a polygraph examination.

For Applicant

Unspecified Drug InvolvementWHILE CLEARED

Unspecified

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a–3.a	13 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).	For Applicant		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a–3.a

13 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).

For Applicant

—

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