Small DOHA Seal

2001 Industrial Security Clearance Decisions

 

These 177 decisions pertain to the adjudication of security clearance cases for contractor personnel under DoD Directive 5220.6, which implements Executive Order 10865.

Other years: 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

12/31/2001

Deliberately and deceptively charging personal purchases twice from a wholesaler to the account of a former employer, using a false name, was classified as misdemeanor thefts. Little extenuating or mitigating evidence was offered to substantiate a claim that the conduct was aberrational. Clearance is denied.


Alcohol; Criminal Conduct

12/31/2001

Applicant committed three DUI offenses between December 1991 and December 1995. He resumed drinking in 1997, with his consumption increasing to weekly after 1999. While he complied with court-mandated treatment, he has not followed up with recommended AA or similar support group. There exists a risk of future alcohol abuse. Moreover, since he was sentenced to a term of two years in prison for OUIL (3rd offense), the Department of Defense is precluded from granting him a security clearance under 10 U.S.C. 986. Clearance is denied.


Criminal Conduct; Personal Conduct; Financial

12/28/2001

While the Applicant has mitigated the Government's concerns regarding his financial situation, the same can not be said as to his criminal and related personal conduct. He has two convictions, and was less than candid about one of them on his 1998 Questionnaire. He was also less than candid about an extra-marital affair in a 2000 sworn statement. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Preference

12/28/2001

The Applicant is a dual citizen with FC1. He also has a current, valid passport from FC1 which will expire in 2009. The Applicant was informed of the requirement to relinquish the passport and has not done so. Adverse inference is not overcome, clearance is denied.


Criminal Conduct

12/26/2001

From 1979 to November 1990, Applicant engaged in illegal drug sales as well as in breaking and entering and larceny, primarily to support a serious alcohol and drug habit. Twice sentenced to terms of imprisonment exceeding one year, Applicant cannot be granted a security clearance absent meritorious circumstances as determined by the Secretary of Defense. Moreover, his lack of complete candor about his criminal past engenders doubt for his judgment, reliability and trustworthiness. Clearance is denied.


Criminal Conduct

12/26/2001

Applicant with a felony conviction in 1998 and sentence of three years incarceration (suspended) is subject to Smith Amendment (10 U.S.C. Sec. 986), and though she has completed her probation and shed her old crowd of friends needs more time to meet meritorious circumstance exception for a waiver. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

12/26/2001

Applicant who exercised dual citizenship with Pakistan by renewing his Pakistani passport in 1998, renounced his Pakistani citizenship and surrendered his Pakistani passport and otherwise demonstrated his preference for the US since becoming a US citizen in 1986. His immediate family members residing in Pakistani pose no unacceptable security risks. Clearance is granted.


Criminal Conduct

12/26/2001

Applicant was convicted in November 1978 of misdemeanor breaking and entering when he was sixteen years of age. Since he was sentenced to two years in jail (suspended), the Department of Defense is statutorily prohibited from granting or renewing his security access pursuant to 10 U.S.C. Section 986. It is recommended the case be considered for a meritorious wavier. Clearance is denied.


Drugs, Personal Conduct

12/26/2001

Applicant's long-term marijuana abuse was discovered by his employer's random drug tests in June 1998 despite his adulterating his first urine sample. He used marijuana again, and then tested positive. Despite his successful drug treatment and favorable prognosis by an expert who evaluated him, Applicant's extensive use of marijuana while he had a clearance is too recent to conclude beyond doubt that he can be trusted to avoid any drug use in the future. After he was granted a security clearance in 1979 and knew of the Government's prohibition against drug use, Applicant used amphetamines until September 1990, cocaine until 1990, and marijuana until at least June 1998. Another security concern is his personal conduct in providing misleading information at the time of a random drug test and on his 1996 Security Clearance Application. Clearance is denied.


Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

12/26/2001

While Applicant resolved his financial problems in February 2000 in order to qualify for a mortgage, he failed to show due diligence in completing a July 1999 Personnel Security Questionnaire. Applicant neglected to disclose adverse financial information required in response to five questions on the form. These security form falsifications due to his negligence underpin security concerns over his personal conduct. With respect to his misleading answers in his November 2000 response to interrogatories from the Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA), Applicant was confused and had no intent to falsify. He had no criminal intent to falsify and was never charged, so the criminal conduct concerns are resolved in his favor. Applicant failed to mitigate the security concerns over his personal conduct. Clearance is denied.


Alcohol; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

12/21/2001

The Applicant has three alcohol related convictions in the 1990's. He has been assessed as suffering from alcohol abuse, yet still consumes the intoxicant. He was also less than candid about his entire criminal background on his 1998 Questionnaire, a violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 1001. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

12/19/2001

Applicant's dual citizenship, including possession and use of a valid foreign passport has not been mitigated. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Preference

12/19/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence (ASDC3I) has authority to establish adjudicative standards, oversee the application of such standards, and to issue clarifying guidance and instructions. Neither an Administrative Judge nor the Board has authority or discretion to ignore, disregard, or decline to apply ASDC3I memorandum concerning foreign passports. Given record evidence that Applicant possesses a current foreign country passport, the Judge properly concluded that ASDC3I memorandum mandated an adverse security clearance decision. Whatever DoD policy or standards may have been in effect when Applicant was granted a security clearance in February 1968, his security eligibility must be adjudicated under current DoD policy and standards. Adverse decision affirmed.


Criminal Conduct

12/18/2001

Conviction of PCP possession, with intent to distribute, and sentence to imprisonment for four years trigger the provision in 10 United States Code, subsection 986(a) that prohibits DoD from granting a security clearance to such an offender who is a DoD contractor employee. Clearance is denied. Consideration of a waiver is recommended.


Sexual Behavior; Criminal Conduct

12/18/2001

Applicant sexually abused his minor daughter from approximately May 1990 to October1991. In April 1992, he pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual battery (a felony) and two counts of non-aggravated sexual battery. His sentence of 15 years in the state penitentiary (adjudged April 1992) for the aggravated sexual battery was suspended and he was placed on supervised probation until mid-1995, when on the recommendation of his probation officer, the probation was changed to unsupervised. Based on 10 U.S.C. 986, Applicant's clearance is denied.


Financial; Personal Conduct

12/17/2001

Applicant's bankruptcy three and a half years ago discharged Federal and state tax claims for tax years 11+ years ago and was mitigated by his current financial stability and the passage of time; he was unaware of tax liens filed against him 7+ years ago when he filed his security clearance application two and a half years ago, denying he had had tax liens within the prior seven years. Clearance is granted.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

12/14/2001

While security concerns arose over Applicant's foreign preference because of his dual citizenship and use of his foreign passport twice after he became a naturalized United States (US) citizen in May 1999, he voluntarily chose to comply with the Department of Defense (DoD) policy requirements when he learned of them: he relinquished his passport and also renounced his foreign citizenship in August 2001. Although his wife and he have relatives who are citizens of a foreign country, they do not have ties to the government, are not agents of a foreign power. Nor could they be exploited by a foreign power in a way that would force him to choose between his ties to them and to the US. So, he has mitigated the allegations of foreign influence. Clearance is granted.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

12/14/2001

While security concerns arose over Applicant's foreign preference because he reapplied to be a citizen of Italy in 1993 and became a dual citizen after he had become a naturalized United States (US) citizen in 1982, he voluntarily chose to comply with the Department of Defense (DoD) policy requirements when he learned of them: he voluntarily renounced his foreign citizenship in October 2001. He never obtained or used a foreign passport after he became a naturalized US citizen. Also, although his wife and he have relatives who are citizens of a foreign country, they do not have ties to the government and are not agents of a foreign power. Nor could they be exploited by a foreign power in a way that would force him to choose between his ties to them and to the US. So, he has mitigated the allegations of foreign influence. Clearance is granted.


Criminal Conduct; Personal Conduct

12/14/2001

Applicant's drug conviction and sentence to two years imprisonment required denial of his clearance under the provisions of 10 U.S.C. 986. Clearance denied.


Personal Conduct

12/13/2001

Applicant failed to indicate a 1999 arrest and six debts when he completed his Security Clearance Application. Applicant failed to list his arrest because the case was dismissed. Applicant's failure to list the six debts was not a deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification of relevant and material facts. Clearance is granted.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

12/13/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. ASDC3I memorandum makes clear that it is DoD policy that possession and use of a foreign passport are security disqualifying and can be mitigated only if the applicant surrenders the foreign passport or obtains official approval for its use from the appropriate agency of the U.S. government. Neither a DOHA Administrative Judge or the Board has the authority or discretion to ignore, disregard, or decline to apply the ASDC3I memorandum. Given the record evidence in this case, the Judge properly concluded that the ASDC3I memorandum mandated an adverse security clearance decision. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial; Personal Conduct

12/13/2001

When completing his Security Clearance Application, the Applicant was not aware of all of his old debts, and answered questions 38 and 39 in the negative. This was a mistake on his pat, as it was not done willfully with the intent to deceive the Government. When he became aware of his indebtedness he promptly satisfied all his creditors. Clearance is granted.


Criminal Conduct; Sexual Behavior

12/13/2001

Applicant sexually abused his two minor daughters from approximately 1986 to February 1993. In July 1993, he pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated sexual battery (felony) and one count of indecent sexual liberties (felony). His sentence of ten years confinement in the state penitentiary (adjudged in October 1993) was suspended and he was placed or supervised probation for an indeterminate period. Based on 10 U.S.C. 986, Applicant's clearance is denied.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

12/12/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. By failing to respond to the File of Relevant Material, Applicant waived his right to have additional information considered in his case. The legality of Applicant's exercise of his rights under bankruptcy law does not preclude the government from considering the negative security implications of his history of recurring financial difficulties. Applicant's history of recurring financial difficulties provides rational basis for the Administrative Judge's adverse conclusions about Applicant's security eligibility. Adverse decision affirmed.


Personal Conduct; Foreign Influence

12/10/2001

Applicant who omitted two prior felony arrests and the citizen status of his spouse in his updated SF-86, and whose spouse, mother-in-law and father-in-law (a high ranking defense official in a foreign government) are a citizen and citizen/residents, respectively, of a foreign country, fails to surmount judgment and trustworthiness lapses manifest in his omissions or absolve himself of risks of foreign influence. Clearance is denied.


Criminal Conduct; Personal Conduct

12/10/2001

When completing his Security Clearance Application, the Applicant indicated that he was never arrested, charged or convicted of a crime. He was not arrested, or convicted but was charged with a minor criminal offense, and placed on Pre-trial Diversion. The Applicant was of the opinion that all matters were then dropped and were null and void. Clearance granted.


Alcohol; Criminal Conduct; Personal Conduct; Financial

12/07/2001

Applicant's excessive alcohol consumption is aggravated by his attempts to conceal the full picture of his alcohol-related history and financial problems. Applicant's personal accomplishments weigh in his favor but have little probative value in determining how he is able to keep his drinking under control since the most recent DUI in August 2000. Clearance is denied.


Financial; Criminal Conduct

12/07/2001

Doctrine of res judicata does not bar an adverse security clearance decision when an applicant has engaged in misconduct after receiving a favorable security clearance decision. Reinstatement of an applicant's security clearance does not preclude government from reconsidering the applicant's past conduct and circumstances as it assesses the applicant's security eligibility in light of new information that has negative security implications. Judge's challenged findings about Applicant's tax situation are sustainable. An applicant's failure to deal with his or her state and federal tax obligations provides a rational basis for drawing adverse conclusions about the applicant's security eligibility. Applicant is not entitled to be allowed to keep her security clearance until she retires. Adverse decision affirmed.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

12/07/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. Administrative Judge erred by concluding Applicant had engaged in the exercise of dual citizenship without a factual finding which supported that conclusion. Judge properly considered the conditional nature of Applicant's statements about his willingness to renounce his foreign country citizenship. Fact that Department of Defense did not ask Applicant to renounce his foreign country citizenship did not preclude Judge from considering Applicant's statements about whether he is willing to renounce his foreign country citizenship. The Judge had a sufficient basis to conclude Applicant has not demonstrated a principal preference for the United States over a foreign country. Harmless error by Judge does not warrant remand or reversal. Adverse decision affirmed.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

12/06/2001

Security concerns remain over Applicant's foreign preference galvanized by his dual citizenship and his repeated use of his foreign passport (which he renewed in December 2000) after he became a naturalized United States (US) citizen in April1992 and had a US passport. He traveled on his Lebanese 17 times, including a July 2001 visit after he received the Statement of Reasons (SOR) expressing security concerns over this use. In January 2001, he stated that he would relinquish the passport if necessary, but he did not chose to do so until September 2001. His mere assertion of an exclusive preference for the US is insufficient. On the other hand he has mitigated the allegations of foreign influence. Although his wife and his relatives are citizens of a foreign country, there is no evidence that they have ties to the government, are agents of a foreign power, or could be exploited by a foreign power in a way that would force him to choose between his ties to them and to the US. Clearance is denied.


Criminal; Alcohol; Personal Conduct

12/04/2001

Applicant's history of criminal conduct, including three DUI convictions, his excessive alcohol abuse, and his intentional material falsification on his security clearance application have not been mitigated by sufficient evidence of reform and rehabilitation. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Preferences; Foreign Influence

11/30/2001

Applicant, a naturalized citizen of the US, who was a citizen of Taiwan solely by virtue of his birth and has not actively pursued dual citizenship with Taiwan since becoming a US citizen, and whose parents, siblings, and in-laws pose no risks to foreign influence, extenuates and mitigates security concerns associated with his maintenance of dual citizenship between Taiwan and the US. Clearance is granted.


Financial; Personal Conduct

11/27/2001

Applicant failed to mitigate the security concerns raised by his finances and personal conduct. While he has now initiated payments for his past federal tax obligations and his past child support arrears, he did not take action either on his federal taxes until after the security investigation began or on his child support obligation until after the state issued a garnishment. He has not demonstrated that he now has control of his finances as he submitted no updated financial statement or references. Nor has he sought any financial counseling. His personal conduct also raises security concerns as he failed to respond fully with required information in response to four material questions on the Security Clearance Application and misrepresented his efforts to resolve his tax debts in this initial security interview. Clearance is denied.


Financial

11/27/2001

Applicant with a string of credit card related debts, child support arrearage and time share default finds sufficient extenuation in his periods of unemployment and mitigation from repayment arrangements with most of his creditors to restore him to acceptable levels of reliability and trustworthiness. Clearance is granted.


Personal Conduct

11/26/2001

Applicant's intentional material falsifications on his security clearance application concerning his past illegal drug involvement has not been mitigated by sufficient evidence of reform and rehabilitation. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

11/26/2001

This 44-year-old Applicant was born in Canada. Served for 20 years in the Canadian military, including a long period in a joint Canadian-American AWACS program, before retiring with her American husband, moving to the US in 1995, and becoming a US citizen in 1999. Her conduct, even when a Canadian, was protective of US interests. She has renounced her Canadian citizenship and surrendered her Canadian passport. She is seeking to join the US Air Force Reserves. Her financial interests in Canada are minimal, compared with her US assets. Extenuation is clearly established. Clearance is granted.


Alcohol; Criminal Conduct; Personal Conduct

11/26/2001

The Applicant has thirty years of alcohol abuse, as evidenced by five arrests and four convictions. He was also less than candid about his criminal record on his 1999 Security Clearance Application, a violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 1001. Clearance is denied.


Alcohol; Personal Conduct

11/21/2001

The Applicant has not consumed any alcohol for more than 27 months and intends no future consumption. He had already divulged the sought after information; and as such, I can find no falsification here. Clearance is granted.


Financial; Criminal Conduct

11/20/2001

Applicant with a history of delinquent debts, including child support arrearage, and no current tangible means of addressing his non-support debts is unable to sufficiently absorb security risks associated with pattern debt delinquency. Nor is Applicant able to surmount poor reliability and trustworthiness implications attributable to his prior assault conviction in 1995 and contempt citation of 1998 arising out of his child support arrearage. Clearance is denied.


Financial; Personal Conduct

11/20/2001

Refusal to deal with significant debts past due for over four years and SF-86 falsification of two financial questions were unmitigated. Clearance is denied.


Alcohol; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

11/19/2001

Administrative Judge's unchallenged findings of fact about Applicant's history of episodic alcohol abuse provide a rational basis for Judge's adverse conclusions under Guideline G. Applicant failed to demonstrate the Judge erred by finding Applicant falsified a security questionnaire by not disclosing alcohol treatment and counseling he received in 1994. Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. Favorable evidence of Applicant's job performance did not preclude Judge from making an adverse decision based on Applicant's history of episodic alcohol abuse and his falsification of a security questionnaire in November 1999. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial

11/19/2001

Forty-three year old Applicant's financial problems stemming from: (1) participation in illegal bookmaking/gambling during 1983-86, resulting in a state income tax liability for the period 1985-86; (2) unwise money management, eventually resulting in a 1995 bankruptcy discharge; and (3) lack of adequate attention to his federal income tax issues resulting in substantial non-gambling related tax arrearage for 1995-97, were mitigated by his enrollment and participation in the Gambler's Anonymous step program; his vow not to gamble in the future; his abstinence from gambling for 15 years; the fact that he initiated good faith efforts to resolve the tax delinquencies; and his history of making timely payments--all prior to the issuance of the SOR. Clearance granted.


Drugs; Alcohol; Personal Conduct

11/19/2001


Financial; Drugs; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

11/19/2001

Administrative Judge did not err by considering Applicant's 1985 bankruptcy in light of Applicant's overall history of recurring financial difficulties that continued up to early 2001. Given Judge's sustainable finding that Applicant might have a recurrence of financial difficulties in the future, it was not arbitrary or capricious for the Judge to conclude Applicant's overall history of recurring financial difficulties raised security concerns even though Applicant's recent discharge in bankruptcy eliminated his current financial pressures. Given Judge's sustainable finding that Applicant engaged in knowing and willful falsification of a security questionnaire, the Judge failed to articulate any rational basis for concluding that Applicant's falsification did not violate 18 U.S.C. Section 1001. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial

11/16/2001

This 41-year-old Applicant incurred approximately 20 delinquent debts and/or judgments beginning in the early 1990s. No extravagant spending was involved. Many of the cited debts and judgments were satisfied years ago, and the bulk of the remainder have been satisfied recently or are in dispute. Present debt in the latter cases is under $1,000. Substantial financial rehabilitation has been demonstrated. Clearance is granted.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

11/16/2001

Applicant who is a dual citizen of Italy solely by reason of his birth there and who has never exercised active dual citizenship with Italy since becoming a naturalized citizen and whose family members holding French/Italian citizenship and residence pose no unacceptable risks of coercion or influence, and extenuates and mitigates security concerns associated with dual citizenship and risks of foreign influence. Clearance is granted.


Financial

11/15/2001

Current version of Adjudicative Guidelines is contained both in copy of Directive provided to all applicants when they are sent a Statement of Reasons and in Title 32 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 147. The Administrative Judge cited and applied pertinent provisions of the current version of the Adjudicative Guidelines to Applicant's case. Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. The Judge's findings and conclusions about Applicant's financial situation reflect a reasonable interpretation of the record evidence and are consistent with pertinent provisions of the Directive.


Financial

11/13/2001

The Applicant has done nothing to alleviate the Government's concerns regarding her $10,000 of past due indebtedness. Clearance is denied.


Financial

11/09/2001

Past due indebtedness incurred during a prolonged period of unemployment and temporary employment was mitigated by small occasional and/or periodic payments over the past three years and a demonstrated willingness to forego extensive reliance on credit. Clearance is granted.


Alcohol; Criminal Conduct

11/09/2001

Although the Applicant's last arrest was more than three years ago, his alcohol consumption is much more recent. He has been diagnosed as being alcohol dependent, but only has 80 days of sobriety. Clearance is denied.


Financial

11/09/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. Having failed to present evidence in response to the File of Relevant Material, Applicant cannot challenge the Administrative Judge's decision based on evidence that was not made available for the Judge's consideration. Adverse decision affirmed.


Sexual Behavior; Personal Conduct

11/07/2001

Although the Applicant is not subject to coercion, he still engages in inappropriate sexual behavior. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence; Financial

11/07/2001

The Applicant is a naturalized American citizen from FC1. He does not have an FC1 passport and is not a dual citizen. His brothers live in two separate foreign countries, but he mitigated the adverse inference of this allegation. However, the Applicant also had severe debt problems which he has not yet resolved, and has no plan for solving in the near future. Overall, adverse inference is not overcome. Clearance is denied.


Personal Conduct, Alcohol, Drug Abuse, Criminal Conduct

11/02/2001

Applicant's conduct raises security concerns over his intentional, repeated omissions of material information from his security form and his problematic and serious alcohol and drug-related behavior. Despite his treatment in May 2000 which led to a diagnosis of Alcohol Dependent and Drug Dependent, Applicant continues to drink. His failure to document positive changes in behavior supportive of sobriety and his misguided omissions on his security form lead to an adverse conclusion. Doubt remains as to whether he is fully rehabilitated given this long history of questionable conduct which indicates a greater need to document a more serious commitment to rehabilitation on his part. Clearance is denied.


Alcohol; Criminal Conduct; Personal Conduct

11/01/2001

Five alcohol-related incidents during 1990-99 and five other arrests during 1989-96 were unmitigated by positive changes in behavior supportive of sobriety or clear evidence of rehabilitation; deliberate falsification of security clearance application and in a Defense Security Service (DSS) interview less than three years ago were not extenuated by use of an arrest record more limited in scope than the questions posed. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Influence; Foreign Preference

10/31/2001

Applicant who is a naturalized citizen of the US and a citizen of Israel solely by virtue of his birth and has not actively pursued dual citizenship since becoming a US citizen, and whose relatives residing in Israel pose no unreasonable risks of pressure or coercion mitigates any raised security concerns. Clearance is granted.


Criminal Conduct; Alcohol; Personal Conduct

10/30/2001

Applicant's conduct raises security concerns over his repeated problematic alcohol-related behavior that led to six alcohol-related arrests from 1977 to 1997 which Applicant failed to document on his 1999 security form. While the dated DWI arrests in the 1970's and 1980's might be overlooked, his pattern of alcohol abuse indicates a need to document a more complete commitment to rehabilitation. Applicant continues to drink. Doubt remains as to whether he is fully rehabilitated given this repeated pattern and given his long history of questionable conduct. Despite a favorable work record, his omission of his alcohol-related arrests on his security form and his failure to document positive changes in behavior supportive of sobriety lead to an adverse conclusion. Clearance is denied.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

10/26/2001

Applicant failed to mitigate security concerns over her finances, personal conduct, and criminal conduct. She disputes debts to three creditors, but has not made any effort to resolve debts to forty other creditors which total over $24,000. She also has a history of arrests for worthless checks and filed for Chapter13 bankruptcy discharge four times in 1993, 1996, 1997, and 1998. As she failed to follow through and make scheduled payments according to these plans, each attempt was dismissed. While she claims an intent to pay her debts, she has offered no plan to do so and has not demonstrated that she has control of her finances. Nor has she sought financial counseling. Further, her personal and criminal conduct raises concerns as she failed to respond fully with required information in response to questions on the Personnel Security Questionnaire. Clearance is denied.


Personal Conduct; Drugs

10/25/2001

Administrative Judge erred in his application of Personal Conduct Mitigating Conditions 2 and 3. Record evidence does not support Judge's finding that Applicant corrected his earlier falsification before being confronted by an investigator. Applicant's belated, piecemeal disclosures did not constitute a prompt good-faith effort to correct his earlier falsification. Correction of Judge's errors mandates reversal. Favorable decision reversed.


Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

10/25/2001

Applicant gave false information when he completed his National Agency Questionnaire and during DSS interviews. He failed to provide data on his siblings who were born in a foreign country, his in-laws living in foreign countries, and nine foreign trips. Because of these material omissions, clearance is denied.


Financial; Personal Conduct

10/25/2001

Applicant owes approximately $ 5,700.00 on four accounts. The Applicant's financial problem began in the 1996 and the bad debts have yet to be paid. When the Applicant completed her standard form 86 she failed to indicate her financial delinquencies of more than 180 days during the previous seven years. The Applicant failed to disclose her financial delinquencies because she was embarrassed about her financial problems and felt disclosing her financial problems she might result in the denial of a clearance. Clearance is denied.


Financial; Personal Conduct

10/24/2001

Applicant with lengthy history of delinquent debts, which she has addressed only minimally, despite represented ability and promises to do so, and who falsifies her SF-86 without any prompt, good faith corrections, fails to adequately extenuate or mitigate her judgment and trustworthiness lapses sufficiently to enable her meet the minimum eligibility requirements to hold a security clearance. Clearance is denied.


Alcohol

10/23/2001

The Applicant has three alcohol related arrests, and has repeatedly violated the provisions of his most recent formal probation. Clearance is denied.


Financial; Personal Conduct

10/22/2001

Applicant with debts from foreclosure deficiency and home improvement loan default mitigates financial risks by established repayment plan, but fails to avert attributions of falsification of her SF-86. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Influence; Foreign Preference

10/22/2001

Applicant reapplied for dual citizenship with the country of his birth because he wanted to be able to go back home to work and stay indefinitely. Applicant currently holds dual citizenship. Applicant has casual and infrequent contacts with his siblings and in-laws, living in foreign countries. Because the Applicant reestablish his foreign citizenship, clearance is denied.


Financial

10/19/2001

Forty-two year old Applicant was discharged from the US Army in 1992, but through error was overpaid $15,470. He recognized the error, but spent the overpayment and did not comply with Army's demand for repayment. The debt remains unpaid. He also failed to pay $3,652 in state income taxes, but the debt is now $847 and likely will be paid in full. Applicant's irresponsibility toward his large federal debt causes doubt as to his security reliability. Clearance is denied.


Drugs; Personal Conduct

10/19/2001

Applicant's drug abuse started in 1982 with marijuana and cocaine use; he continued to use marijuana until August 1997 when a positive drug test led to his termination of employment. Nevertheless, even after he applied for a security clearance and made a commitment to himself and the government to remain drug-free, he again used drugs with a co-worker in July 2000. Applicant's marijuana use is too recent and extensive to demonstrate his commitment to avoid any drug use in the future despite his renewed statement of intent. Further, Applicant minimized his drug use on his initial security form and has engaged in questionable personal conduct in violation of policies and regulations in his previous employment. Clearance is denied.


Criminal Conduct; Alcohol; Personal Conduct

10/19/2001

Although an Administrative Judge's credibility determinations are entitled to deference, they are not immune from review on appeal. A Judge cannot uncritically accept a witness's testimony without considering whether it is plausible and consistent with other record evidence. A Judge's acceptance of an applicant's explanation for his or her conduct must be based on a reasonable interpretation of the record evidence as a whole. In making findings of fact, a Judge must make a reasonable, common sense evaluation about the significance of the presence or absence of corroborating evidence. The record evidence as a whole does not support Applicant's loss of memory defense. Favorable decision reversed.


Financial

10/18/2001

Considering the entire record as a whole, the filing of a second bankruptcy action within three years of completing the first reorganization, coupled with the absence of positive evidence reflecting meaningful changes in Applicant's financial habits, Applicant's evidence in mitigation and extenuation is insufficient to persuasively demonstrate Applicant will not encounter future financial problems similar to those she has encountered in the past. Clearance is denied.


Personal Conduct

10/09/2001

Although Applicant remained present while acquaintances used illegal drugs, and was likely to continue to do so, evidence did not support conclusion that she was subject to coercion, pressure, duress, or was otherwise likely to deliberately or inadvertently mishandle classified information. Clearance granted.


Drugs; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

10/09/2001

Administrative Judge's finding that Applicant falsified material facts on a security questionnaire in November 1998 is sustainable. Federal government need not wait until an applicant mishandles or fails to properly safeguard classified information before it can deny or revoke access to such information. An applicant with good job performance may engage in off-duty conduct that has negative security implications. Judge explained why she concluded Applicant's history of marijuana use (1991-January 2000) and his falsification of security questionnaire in November 1998 warranted adverse formal findings under Guidelines H, E, and J. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial

10/04/2001

DOHA proceedings are not a proper forum for challenging the validity of a civil judgment entered against the applicant, or the validity of federal taxes assessed against the applicant by the Internal Revenue Service. Administrative Judge had a rational basis for his application of Financial Considerations Disqualifying Conditions 1 and 3. A history of excessive indebtedness or recurring financial difficulties reflects adversely on an applicant's security eligibility. Adverse decision affirmed.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

10/03/2001

Applicant's foreign contacts, and emotional and family ties have not been mitigated. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

09/28/2001

Applicant, who is a naturalized citizen of the US and was a citizen of Iran by virtue of his birth and his parents' birth in the country, and who surrendered his passport and renounced his Iranian citizenship, extenuates and mitigates security concerns associated with his active maintenance of dual citizenship between Iran and the US. However, Applicant's immediate family members who reside in Iran remain vulnerable to pressure and coercion sufficiently to pose continuing foreign influence concerns. Clearance is denied.


Drugs; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

09/28/2001

Applicant with recurrent history of illicit drug abuse and expressions of intent not to use drugs in the future, only to return, and who fails to provide reliable and trustworthy explanations of discrepant periods of use and purchases, fails to mitigate, notwithstanding good performance evaluations, using both Guidelines and E.2.2 factors. Clearance is denied.


Alcohol; Criminal Conduct; Financial

09/26/2001

Applicant's history of alcohol abuse--punctuated by five alcohol-related arrests--and financial irresponsibility were not mitigated where Applicant failed to corroborate claims of rehabilitation. Clearance denied.


Criminal Conduct; Personal Conduct; Alcohol

09/26/2001

Although Administrative Judge had to consider Applicant's explanation for not disclosing his alcohol-related offenses in response to question on a security questionnaire, the Judge was not required, as a matter of law, to accept Applicant's explanation. There is insufficient record evidence to support Judge's finding that Applicant abused alcohol after 1996. Adverse decision affirmed.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

09/26/2001

Applicant was born, raised, and educated in Italy and served in the Italian Air Force, all prior his moving to the US and becoming a naturalized US citizen. Applicant believed his foreign citizenship continued after he became a US citizen, but he was mistaken. He lost his Italian citizenship when he took the oath of US naturalization, so he is not a duel citizen. Applicant did have an Italian passport which was granted to him prior to his US naturalization and renewed after becoming a US citizen, which has been annulled. The Applicant owns real estate and bank accounts in Italy but his foreign assets are not as significant as his US financial interests and contacts. Contacts with his cousins who reside in Italy are casual and infrequent. Clearance is granted.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

09/26/2001

Board does not conduct a de novo review of an Administrative Judge's decision; rather Board addresses material issues raised by the parties. As to questions of law, Board's scope of review is plenary. Under the DoD Directive 5220.6, neither a DOHA Administrative Judge nor the Board has the authority or discretion to ignore, disregard, or decline to apply a memorandum promulgated under Section 5.1 of the Directive by the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence (ASDC3I). Prior DOHA decisions on foreign passport cases are superseded by ASDC3I memo to the extent those decisions are inconsistent with the guidance provided by the ASDC3I memo. Adverse decision affirmed.


Criminal Conduct; Personal Conduct; Financial

09/25/2001

An applicant has burden of presenting evidence to rebut, explain, extenuate, or mitigate facts admitted by the applicant or proven by Department Counsel. Because there is no presumption of error below, the Board need not address or review an Administrative Judge's unchallenged findings. Government need not wait until a person mishandles or fails to properly safeguard classified information before it can decide to deny or revoke access to such information. Regardless of what forms of conduct an applicant has not engaged in, the Judge has the obligation to evaluate the security significance of the conduct the applicant did engage in. Adverse decision affirmed.


Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

09/21/2001

Board does not review a case de novo. Rather, Board addresses the material issues raised by the parties. Board cannot consider new evidence. An applicant's statements about his or her intent or state of mind are relevant evidence, but they are not binding or conclusive on an Administrative Judge. The Judge's findings that Applicant falsified material facts in a security clearance application in 1999 and a written statement in 2000 are sustainable and provide a rational basis for the Judge's adverse conclusions. Adverse decision affirmed.


Security Violations; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

09/20/2001

Absent an act of Congress or Presidential directive, there is no time limitation on security clearance adjudications. Doctrine of laches cannot be raised as a defense in security clearance cases. Even if other people failed to fulfill their security responsibilities, such a failure would not relieve Applicant of responsibility for his own actions or inactions with respect to his security duties. A Statement of Reasons is an administrative pleading that is aimed at placing an applicant on reasonable notice of the allegations against him or her; it need not enumerate every fact or piece of evidence that may be relevant to the allegation made against an applicant. An allegation in the Statement of Reasons may be included under more than one Guideline. The Judge's analysis and conclusions about Applicant's security violations are reasonable and sustainable. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

09/17/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. There is no presumption of error below and the appealing party must raise claims of error with specificity and identify how the Administrative Judge committed factual or legal error. Apart from a factual error that is harmless, the Judge's challenged findings of fact are sustainable. The Judge considered the facts and circumstances of Applicant's case as required by the Directive. The Judge gave rational explanations for not applying certain Adjudicative Guidelines mitigating conditions. Applicant's history of financial difficulties and his use of a false address in order to gain a lower tuition rate at a technical school provide a rational basis for the Judge's adverse conclusions about Applicant's security eligibility. Adverse decision affirmed.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

09/10/2001

Applicant failed to mitigate security concerns over foreign preference prompted by his dual citizenship as he possesses and repeatedly has used a foreign passport to travel to Israel even after he became a United States (US) citizen in 1988 and had a US passport. He failed to relinquish his foreign passport after being advised in May 2001 of this requirement of US policy; his mere assertion of an exclusive preference for the US is insufficient. However, he has mitigated the allegations of foreign influence. Although his wife, her relatives, and his friends are citizens of foreign countries, there is no evidence that they are agents of a foreign power or would be exploited by a foreign power in a way that would force him to choose between his ties to them and to the US. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

09/07/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. Applicant's honesty with the government did not preclude the Administrative Judge from evaluating the security significance of the information Applicant provided about the facts and circumstances of his conduct and family ties with a foreign country. The federal government need not wait until an applicant mishandles or fails to properly safeguard classified information before it can deny or revoke access to such information. Judge had a rational basis for concluding Applicant's family ties with a foreign country raised security concerns. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial

09/05/2001

Applicant failed to mitigated the security concerns raised by her finances because of long-standing debts of approximately $7,000 to eight creditors. While she had a two year period of unemployment from 1996-1998, she took no action to address her past creditors even after she was re-employed in 1998. Neither did she seek help through financial counseling. In the succeeding years she has taken only limited steps to address her debts. It was not until after she received the Statement of Reasons detailing the financial concerns that she contacted all of her creditors. She reported in December 2000 she had plans to pay them each a small monthly amount to resolve the debts. However, since then, she failed to document any actual payments. Thus, she has not yet sufficiently demonstrated that she now has control of her finances. Clearance is denied.


Financial

08/31/2001

Thirty-eight year old Applicant's history of not meeting his financial obligations--attributed to his mismanagement of finances--though partially mitigated by eventually entering into payment arrangements with some creditors and subsequently making monthly payments of the agreed amounts motivated by the security clearance review process, and his continuing refusal to satisfy two outstanding debts associated with a purchase of a vacation home time-share, contending, without evidence to support his contention, that the debts were not legitimate, raises grave questions and doubts as to his security eligibility and suitability. Clearance is denied.


Financial; Personal Conduct

08/31/2001

Applicant failed to mitigated the security concerns raised by her finances and personal conduct. While she has now initiated payments for a state sales tax obligation, she did not do so until the state issued a Writ of Garnishment. She resolved over $300,000 in liabilities through a Chapter 7 bankruptcy discharge proceeding, in part for debts from a failed business; but she has not demonstrated that she now has control of her finances, nor has she sought any financial counseling. While she is well regarded at her place of employment, her personal conduct raises concerns as she failed to respond fully with required information in response to two material questions on the Personnel Security Questionnaire. Clearance is denied.


Drugs

08/29/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. An applicant is entitled to have his or her case adjudicated based on the application of pertinent provisions of the Directive (including the Adjudicative Guidelines), as opposed to an Administrative Judge's opinion as to what the applicant is required to do to overcome the government's case. Viewed in the context of the Judge's decision as a whole, the Judge's statements about the desirability of a drug treatment and rehabilitation program are harmless error. Applicant's past use of marijuana and his statements concerning future use of marijuana provide a rational basis for the Judge's adverse conclusions. Adverse decision affirmed.


Personal Conduct; Information Technology; Criminal Conduct

08/28/2001

This 37-year-old computer specialist was fired in 1995 after using his work computer to access and download pornography. He then knowingly omitted the incident from his 1999 security clearance application.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

08/28/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. Evidence of an applicant's good job performance does not preclude an Administrative Judge from considering the security significance of an applicant's off-duty conduct and circumstances. Applicant's history of unresolved financial difficulties provides a rational basis for the Judge's adverse conclusions. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial

08/27/2001

Applicant owes approximately $ 19,500.00 on ten accounts. The Applicant is current on one account, but there is no indication the other accounts are being resolved. Clearance is denied.


Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

08/27/2001

When completing her Security Clearance Application, Applicant failed to indicated her past cocaine use over a 16-year period, at times, using up to $300.00 of cocaine per day, and that she had been treated numerous times for cocaine dependence. Nor was she truthful when initially interviewed by the Defense Security Service. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

08/27/2001

Applicant is a dual US-Canadian citizen born, raised, and educated in Canada. He has lived in the US since July 1998. The Applicant's father and ten siblings are Canadian citizens living in Canada. His wife is a Canadian citizen living in the US. His mother is a US citizen living in Canada. The Applicant is conditionally willing to renounce is Canadian citizenship for employment opportunities. Clearance is denied due to unacceptable risk of foreign preference.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

08/23/2001

Applicant failed to mitigate security concerns over foreign preference prompted by his dual citizenship: after he became a naturalized US citizen in August 1985, he possessed a foreign passport and used this foreign passport for trips to Iran in 1994 and 1998. He has not relinquished the foreign passport which expires in October 2001 and has not acted to document his exclusive preference for the US. (The fact that the government of Iran does not allow people born in Iran to travel to Iran with a US passport does not mitigate the use of a foreign passport under current US security policy.) While his parents and siblings are citizens of this foreign country and reside there, the ties are so casual and infrequent that he would not be subject to foreign influence. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

08/21/2001

Applicant who initiated and has maintained active dual citizenship with the country of his birthplace and offers only a conditional renunciation of his foreign citizenship fails to extenuate and mitigate security concerns associated with his active maintenance of a dual citizenship between Italy and the US. Foreign influence concerns are mitigated by the absence of any shown risk of Applicant's parents and brother being subject to pressure or coercion in their native Italy. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

08/21/2001

Possession of a British passport obtained prior to naturalization of a Hong Kong citizen is mitigated by surrender of the passport to the British Embassy and submission of an application to renounce British nationality; presence of the father, grandmothers, and, at times, mother in Hong Kong, now under PRC control, raises reasonable doubts as to the extent of the Applicant's vulnerability to pressure, coercion, and/or noncoercive persuasion to compromise classified information. Clearance is denied.


Drugs

08/17/2001

Applicant's drug abuse started in 1991 with marijuana and continued until February 2001, including repeated use even after he applied for a security clearance and made a commitment to himself and the government to remain drug-free. In 1994-98 he experimented with a variety of other drugs and purchased and sold marijuana and LSD on a limited scale in college. Since his drug use other than marijuana as well as his drug purchases and sales were confined to his college days (1994-98) and not subsequently repeated, that involvement can be mitigated. But Applicant's marijuana use is too recent and extensive to demonstrate his commitment to avoid any drug use in the future despite his renewed statement of intent. Clearance is denied.


Criminal Conduct; Personal Conduct

08/17/2001

Applicant was arrested in March 1998 after his 14-year-old sister called the police when she became upset by his efforts to supervise her weekend activities. Although he remained in police custody for more than 24 hours, no charges were ever filed against him. Applicant's involvement in this incident and his failure to list the arrest on his SF 86 (Security Clearance Application) are mitigated by his exculpatory explanation of the circumstances of the arrest, and by the absence of evidence his arrest involved misconduct which impugns his judgment, trustworthiness, or reliability. Clearance is granted.


Alcohol; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

08/17/2001

Over 20 years of alcohol consumption, four alcohol-related incidents, a diagnosis of alcohol dependence some seven years ago, and current drinking after completion of an outpatient group rehabilitation program are unmitigated by steps taken to avoid drinking and driving; falsification of an SF-86 less than three years ago by denial of alcohol-related counseling or treatment is also unmitigated. Clearance is denied.


Drugs

08/15/2001

Applicant's drug abuse began in 1996 with marijuana, cocaine, LSD, and Valium during high school and during a period of family crisis as his parents' divorce was followed by his mother's death. While those difficulties do not excuse his drug use, those circumstances put it in context. He continued to use and purchase marijuana until July 2000 when he made a believable commitment to cease using any drugs. He now has a year of abstinence that is supported not simply by his own testimony, but also by his sister who has also noted his increased maturity, and by his manager who has noted his continual improvement at work which led to a recent promotion. Thus, I conclude he has been able to demonstrate his commitment to avoid any drug use for over a year and has had a subsequent clean drug test. Clearance is granted.


Financial; Personal Conduct

08/15/2001

Given the record evidence in this case, it was not arbitrary or capricious for the Administrative Judge to conclude Applicant is honest and professional on the job, but that she falsified her security clearance application in June 1999. Judge's findings about Applicant's financial difficulties are sustainable. Applicant had notice of Adjudicative Guidelines mitigating conditions before she received the Judge's decision. Applicant's promise to clear up her remaining debts in the future does not demonstrate Judge's adverse conclusions under Guideline F are arbitrary, capricious or contrary to law. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

08/15/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. Administrative Judge's findings about Applicant's financial difficulties are supported by record evidence as a whole. Judge's analysis of Applicant's history of financial difficulties is consistent with pertinent provisions of Directive. Applicant's history of financial difficulties provides rational basis for Judge's adverse conclusions. Adverse decision affirmed.


Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

08/14/2001

Applicant's conduct raises security concerns over his repeated problematic and misguided personal and criminal conduct over his relationships with his estranged wife and two girlfriends which led to termination of employment with two defense contractors and repeated convictions for criminal conduct in the 1993-1998 period . While the therapy in 1998-99 helped him to better understand the whole pattern of his behavior, Applicant has not again been involved with a woman, so the expert witness could not predict with certainty what his future personal conduct would be if he were disappointed in a romantic relationship. Except for the college incident in1980, doubt remains as to whether he is fully rehabilitated given this repeated pattern of rule violations in his personal life and given his long history of questionable conduct. Clearance is denied.


Personal Conduct

08/13/2001

Administrative Judge is not compelled, as a matter of law, to accept the testimony of a witness at face value merely because it is unrebutted. A Judge may discount a witness's testimony based on a negative assessment of the witness's credibility. Judge erred by discussing Applicant's conduct under Guideline M, which was not alleged in the SOR; but Applicant has failed to show how he was harmed by the Judge's error. Applicant's unauthorized accessing of hospital patient records when he was a hospital security guard provides a rational basis for the Judge's adverse conclusions. Adverse decision affirmed.


Criminal Conduct; Personal Conduct

08/09/2001

Fifty-one year old Applicant's December 1998 arrest for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon without intent to kill, a felony in the 3rd degree (which was eventually reduced to improper exhibition of a dangerous weapon), and the plea bargain resulting in pretrial diversion and a Nolle Prosequi, his suspension and eventual termination from his job as a security guard, and his failure to be candid regarding the incident on his SF 86 in January 1999 raise grave questions and doubts as to his security eligibility and suitability. Clearance is denied.


Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

08/08/2001

Admitted falsification of a security clearance questionnaire by minimizing the frequency of marijuana use between 5 and 10 years ago was mitigated by the Applicant's prompt, good-faith effort to correct the falsification before being confronted with the facts during an initial DSS interview two months after the questionnaire was signed; violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001 was isolated. Clearance is granted.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence; Personal Conduct

08/08/2001

This 47-year-old Applicant is a dual citizen of FC by birth and the U.S. by naturalization in 1990. He has close family and emotional ties to FC , has not surrendered his FC passport, and indicates only a conditional willingness to renounce his FC citizenship. Incorrect answers in his security clearance application were not intentional. No extenuation shown for FC preference and influence. Clearance denied.


Alcohol; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

08/03/2001

Four DUIs in less than 12 years, a diagnosis of alcohol dependence, outpatient alcohol counseling four years ago, and one year's AA attendance was not mitigated because the Applicant is still drinking; voluntary correction of falsification was not prompt because it occurred over a year and a half after the falsification occurred. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

07/31/2001

Applicant is a scientist who was born in Canada 31 years aga to an American mother who had moved to Canada seeking work during the 1950's In 1991, he applied for a United States passport in order to attend graduate school in the U.S. He has lived in the U.S. continuously since August 1991, receiving a Ph.D. in mathematics in May 1996. He considers himself a United States citizen and intends to continue working and living in the United States. Although he has never held a Canadian passport or exercised any rights of citizenship (Canadian) since he began living in the United States in 1991, he has stated he is unwilling to renounce his Canadian citizenship. Clearance is granted.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

07/27/2001

Obtaining German citizenship and passport by a native-born U.S. citizen, who finds the murder of many of his Jewish maternal relatives during the Holocaust repugnant and who would therefore never move to Germany, is mitigated by his recent surrender of the passport for destruction by the German consulate and his willingness to renounce German citizenship if necessary to continue his security clearance. Clearance is granted.


Alcohol

07/26/2001

Twenty-three year old Applicant's relatively brief period of alcohol abuse during July 1997 through August 1999; and his three alcohol-related incidents, including one charge without arrest (public intoxication and minor in possession) in 1997, and two arrests in 1998 (public intoxication) and 1999 (making alcohol available to a minor); in the absence of any diagnosis of alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence by a credentialed medical professional; are mitigated by his apparent rehabilitation; and his continuing abstinence since October 1999. Clearance is granted.


Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct; Foreign Influence

07/25/2001

Applicant's intentional material falsifications on his security clearance application of April 14, 2000, and his substantial foreign ties and contacts that may pose a risk of foreign influence, have not been mitigated. Clearance is denied.


Personal Conduct; Foreign Influence

07/23/2001

There is no presumption of error below and the appealing party has the burden of raising and demonstrating factual or legal error by the Administrative Judge. Appealing party must set forth its claims of error with specificity. Applicant's pro se status does not relieve her of the obligation to raise specific claims of error. Board does not review cases de novo. Adverse decision affirmed.


Personal Conduct; Foreign Influence; Criminal Conduct

07/23/2001

There is no presumption of error below and the appealing party has the burden of raising and demonstrating factual or legal error by the Administrative Judge. Appealing party must set forth its claims of error with specificity. Applicant's pro se status does not relieve him of the obligation to raise specific claims of error. Board does not review cases de novo. Adverse decision affirmed.


Foreign Preference

07/20/2001

Fifty-three year old native-born American applicant, who, in about 1998, applied for and received Irish citizenship based on her mother's Irish birth, and obtained an Irish passport which she has never used; despite a declared willingness to renounce the Irish citizenship and to invalidate the Irish passport; her failure to surrender the Irish passport; and her failure to obtain official approval for the foreign passport's use from the appropriate agency of the United States Government; in light of the August 2000 ASD/C3I memorandum implementing a passport policy clarification, raises questions and doubts as to her allegiance to the United States and as to her security eligibility and suitability. Clearance is denied.


Foreign Preference

07/13/2001

Applicant kept her foreign passport after becoming naturalized. Applicant has now surrendered the foreign passport. Clearance granted.


Foreign Influence; Personal Conduct

07/13/2001

Extensive and growing financial stake in Panama in comparison with the stake in the U.S. is unmitigated. Clearance is denied.


Criminal Conduct

07/12/2001

Applicant was arrested in 1999 for a class two misdemeanor. Due to the isolated nature of the incident, clearance is granted.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

07/11/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. An applicant's intent or state of mind can be proven through indirect or circumstantial evidence. Falsification can be proven despite an applicant's denial of any intent to make a false or misleading statement or omission. Administrative Judge's conclusions about Applicant's history of financial difficulties are sustainable. Harmless errors by the Judge do not warrant remand or reversal. Nothing in Executive Order 10865 or DoD Directive 5220.6 gives a Judge or the Board authority to expunge or remove matters from an applicant's record. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial

07/09/2001

Applicant has mitigated security concerns over his finances as he has initiated a good faith effort to resolve his debts to one creditor and has paid off the other four creditors in full. He is now in a favorable financial position and is committed to a responsible life style. To his credit he is highly regarded as competent and trustworthy at his place of employment. According to a financial expert, Applicant's level of savings is admirable: his debt to earnings ratio is well within the acceptable range. He is not financially over-extended and he has met and is meeting all of his obligations. Applicant is in "good shape financially." Applicant is an acceptable credit risk who is living within his means and has a larger percentage of disposable savings and income than most people. Clearance is granted.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

07/09/2001

There is no presumption of error below and the appealing party has the burden of raising and demonstrating factual or legal error by the Administrative Judge. Board does not review cases de novo. Rather, the Board is limited to reviewing the Judge's decision under the terms of the Directive, Additional Procedural Guidance, Item E3.1.32. Absent a showing of error that affects an applicant's right to have legal representation or to present evidence on his or her behalf during the proceedings below, an applicant is not entitled to have the case remand for another hearing. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial; Personal Conduct

07/03/2001

Neither the Administrative Judge nor the Board has authority or supervisory jurisdiction over security clearance investigations. Having decided to waive a hearing, Applicant cannot complain that he was denied the opportunity to have the Judge assess his credibility. Applicant's statements about his motivations, intentions, or state of mind are relevant and material information, but they are not binding or conclusive on the Judge. The Ex Post Facto Clauses of the Constitution do not apply to security clearance adjudications. A Statement of Reasons is an administrative pleading that is not held to the strict requirements of a criminal indictment, and it is not an end in itself, but rather a means to assist the disposition of a case on the merits instead of pleading niceties. Adverse decision affirmed.


Criminal Conduct; Personal Conduct

06/28/2001

Applicant's conduct raises security concerns over his criminal conduct and personal conduct as he deliberately misled the Government by material omissions from his security form. Thus, the Government established a case of criminal falsification under 18 U.S.C. section 1001 as he was clearly put on notice that he had a duty to reveal all adverse information on the SF 86. Instead he improperly certified that his answers were "true, complete, and correct." On the other hand his misdemeanor arrests can be mitigated as not recent. Clearance is denied.


Criminal Conduct; Alcohol; Drugs; Personal Conduct

06/28/2001

Applicant's conduct raises security concerns over his criminal conduct, alcohol abuse, drug abuse, and personal conduct. Applicant deliberately misled the Government by material omissions from his security form. Thus, the Government established a case of personal conduct and criminal falsification under 18 U.S.C. section 1001 as he was clearly put on notice that he had a duty to reveal all adverse information on the SF 86. Instead, he improperly certified that his answers were "true, complete, and correct." While he has mitigated, in part, the allegation of continuing to abuse alcohol as he stopped drinking, he did not mitigate the overall concern over his alcohol abuse as he has not demonstrated twelve months of sobriety in his after care program. He mitigated the drug abuse charge as he stopped using drugs and has had subsequent clean drug tests. Clearance is denied.


Financial, Alcohol, Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

06/26/2001

Applicant's conduct raises security concerns over his finances, alcohol abuse, personal conduct, and criminal conduct. He admitted filing for bankruptcy in 1987 which was discharged and again in 2000. He claimed his debts were discharged in the 2000 filing but failed to submit any evidence of the discharge. Further Applicant deliberately misled the Government by omissions from his security form. Thus, the Government has established a case of criminal falsification under 18 U.S.C. section 1001 as he was clearly put on notice of his duty to reveal all adverse information on the SF 86. Instead he improperly certified that his answers were "true, complete, and correct." On the other hand he has mitigated the isolated alcohol-related arrest. Clearance is denied.


Financial; Personal Conduct

06/25/2001

Failure to file or pay Federal income taxes for four successive tax years, resulting in IRS tax liens, by an Applicant because, unknown to her, her husband did not mail the joint returns or make payment in a timely fashion is no bar to the grant or continuation of her personal security clearance; omission of the tax liens from her SF-86 clearance application was innocent and not deliberate. Clearance is granted.


Financial

06/25/2001

Applicant's conduct raises security concerns over his finances as he admitted five debts which total over $10,000. While he claimed in December 2000 to have resolved these debts though bankruptcy, he failed to submit any evidence of having done so. Clearance is denied.


Financial

06/22/2001

Applicant's ten past due debts from the mid-l990's are mitigated by her efforts to pay several of the debts in full and also by the fact that the conditions that resulted in the debts were largely beyond her control. Most of the other debts have been written off by the creditors and no longer appear on her credit report. Applicant has shown she has reformed her credit practices as she was able to finance her own home and also stay current on her new obligations. Her increased salary puts her in a better posture to handle her current finances responsibly and to address the minor unresolved debts. Trustworthiness determination granted.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence; Personal Conduct

06/22/2001

Thirty-four year old Applicant's use of a Moroccan passport--since expired--on one occasion in 1996, after he became an American citizen, while of concern, cannot be considered merely in isolation, but should be analyzed in light of all the facts and circumstances to determine the possible existence of a foreign preference. The foreign citizenship and residency status of Applicant's parents and siblings--none of whom are agents of a foreign government or in positions to be exploited by those governments--does not constitute an unacceptable security risk. Under the specific facts in evidence herein, the Government's security concerns have been mitigated by Applicant's strong preference for, and demonstrated loyalty and allegiance to, the United States, over Morocco. Clearance is granted.


Financial; Personal Conduct

06/22/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. There is no presumption of error below and the appealing party has the burden of raising and demonstrating error. Administrative Judge's finding of falsification reflects a plausible, reasonable interpretation of record evidence. Negative effects that adverse security clearance decision might have on Applicant's career do not render Judge's decision arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law. Board has no authority to address reapplication questions. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial

06/20/2001

Some $3,500 in six past due debts were mitigated by payment in full of five and substantial payment of the last debt through systematic savings program and by the conditions that resulted in the debts that were largely beyond the Applicant's control. Trustworthiness determination granted.


Alcohol

06/19/2001

It was not arbitrary or capricious for Administrative Judge to give weight to diagnosis of Applicant as alcohol dependent. Judge's findings about Applicant's alcohol consumption are sustainable. Alcohol abuse raises security concerns even if it occurs during off-duty hours. Judge gave rational explanation for concluding that Applicant had failed to meet his burden of demonstrating reform and rehabilitation or changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a favorable security clearance decision. Adverse decision affirmed.


Drugs

06/11/2001

Applicant's occasional use of marijuana during the period from the Summer of 1993, after he had graduated from college, to July 1999, two months after completing his SF 86, is of concern, especially in light of his desire to have access to the nation's secrets. In the absence of a "demonstrated intent" not to abuse any drugs in the future, grave questions and doubts are raised as to his security eligibility and suitability. Clearance is denied.


Drugs

06/08/2001

Applicant's occasional use of marijuana on three separate occasions during the period estimated as January 1994 to Easter Sunday 1997--while in his late 30s--as well as his stated position that, if given the opportunity to smoke marijuana while socializing with friends in the future, he might do so--a position which he stated in May 2000 and restated in April 2001, and only rejected in May 2001--is of concern, especially in light of his desire to have continued access to the nation's secrets. In the absence of a "demonstrated intent" not to abuse any drugs in the future, grave questions and doubts are raised as to his security eligibility and suitability. Clearance is denied.


Personal Conduct

06/08/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. When Applicant failed to submit any documents or other information in response to the File of Relevant Material, he waived his right to have such documents or other information considered in his case. Administrative Judge's finding of falsification is sustainable. Expungement of a criminal record under state law is not binding on federal government and would not relieve an applicant of the obligation to disclose his or her criminal record in response to questions on the security clearance form. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial; Personal Conduct

06/04/2001

Legality of Applicant's exercise of his rights under bankruptcy law does not preclude the government from considering the negative security implications of his history of financial difficulties. Applicant has burden of presenting evidence to rebut, explain, extenuate or mitigate his history of financial difficulties. Opinions of Applicant's employer or supervisor about him are not binding or conclusive on Judge. Applicant's contributions to his defense contractor employer are not relevant or material to determining his suitability for a security clearance. Harmless errors by Administrative Judge do not warrant remand or reversal. Adverse decision affirmed.


Foreign Influence; Foreign Preference

05/24/2001

Fifty-six year old Applicant's participation in "national service" in an international cooperation program at a Canadian university, under the joint auspices of the French Ministry of War and Ministry of Foreign Affairs during 1969-71, which occurred while he was a French citizen, and prior to becoming a Canadian citizen in May 1972, or an American citizen in March 1983, when he took an oath of citizenship and renounced all other allegiances, while relevant under the whole person concept, in this instance, is no longer of security concern. The foreign citizenship and residency status of Applicant's children (Canadian), brother and sister (French), and his sisters-in-law (Canadian)--none of whom are agents of those foreign governments or in positions to be exploited by those governments--does not constitute an unacceptable security risk. The renewal and retention of French and Canadian passports after he became an American citizen--without any use--until the Canadian passport expired in 1998, and he surrendered the French passport to the authorities in March 2001, while of concern, cannot be considered merely in isolation, but should be analyzed in light of all the facts and circumstances to determine the possible existence of a foreign preference. The combined overseas holdings of Applicant and his wife constitute substantially less than 10 percent of their combined United States holdings, and given that ratio and considering the countries in which the foreign financial interests are located (France and Canada), it appears those foreign holdings are too insubstantial to his overall worth to open himself to vulnerability to foreign influence. Under the specific facts in evidence herein, the Government's security concerns have been mitigated by Applicant's strong preference for, and demonstrated loyalty and allegiance to, the United States, over France and Canada. Clearance is granted.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

05/16/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. An appealing party cannot fairly contend, based on evidence that was not presented for Administrative Judge's consideration, that the Judge's findings of fact are in error. Judge's findings about Applicant's history of financial difficulties and her past disciplinary problems reflect a reasonable interpretation of record evidence. Applicant's promise to pay off her unresolved debts in the future does not constitute evidence of reform and rehabilitation. Conduct or circumstances that, if considered in isolation, might not warrant an adverse security clearance decision still can be evidence of poor judgment, unreliability or untrustworthiness that supports an overall adverse security clearance decision in light of the totality of the record evidence. Adverse decision affirmed.


Foreign Preference

05/15/2001

Thirty-six year old Applicant's voting in a British election, service with the Royal Navy during 1982-89, and use of a British passport, all of which occurred while he was a British citizen, and prior to becoming an American citizen in July 1997, when he took an oath of citizenship and renounced other allegiances, while relevant under the whole person concept, in this instance, are no longer of security concern. The retention of the British passport after he became an American citizen--without any use--until he surrendered it to the authorities in January 2001 cannot be considered merely in isolation, but should be analyzed in light of all the facts and circumstances to determine if an applicant is demonstrating a foreign preference within the meaning of Guideline C. Under the specific facts in evidence herein, the Government's security concerns have been mitigated by Applicant's strong preference for, and demonstrated loyalty and allegiance to, the United States, over the United Kingdom; and his expressed unequivocal belief that he had already renounced his British citizenship. Clearance is granted.


Drugs

05/14/2001

Even if an Administrative Judge's findings of fact are supported by the record evidence or are unchallenged on appeal, the Board may still need to determine whether the inferences and conclusions the Judge drew from those findings are reasonable if they are challenged on appeal. The inferences and conclusions the Judge drew from her findings of fact about Applicant's history of marijuana use during the period from 1992 to June 2000, while Applicant held a security clearance, are reasonable and sustainable. Absent a showing of harmful error that affects a party's right to present evidence in the proceedings below, a party does not have a right to a second chance at presenting its case before a Judge. Having decided to represent himself during the proceedings below, Applicant cannot fairly complain about the quality of his self-representation or seek to be relieved of the consequences of his decision to represent himself. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial; Criminal Conduct; Personal Conduct

05/09/2001

Fifty-two year old Applicant's continuing history of not meeting her financial obligations, including long-standing accounts charged off or sent to collection; a lengthy pattern of criminal activity, including the issuance of bad checks on accounts which were either overdrawn or closed, embezzlement of a check from her employer and her attempt to cash it; and her deliberate falsification on an SF 86 of relevant and material facts pertaining to her past personal conduct, criminal conduct, and financial actions, raises grave questions and doubts as to her security eligibility and suitability. Clearance is denied.


Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

05/09/2001

When faced with conflicting evidence, the Administrative Judge must carefully weigh the evidence in a reasonable, common sense manner and make findings of fact that reflect a reasonable interpretation of the record evidence that takes into account all the record evidence. Applicant's explanations are clearly relevant and material information about his intent or state of mind when he completed the security questionnaire. However, Applicant's explanations are not binding on the Judge. When considering Applicant's explanations, the Judge had to assess Applicant's credibility. Judge's finding of falsification is sustainable. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial

05/03/2001

When adjudicating an appeal from a decision concerning an applicant's eligibility to occupy a sensitive position under DoD Regulation 5200.2-R, the Board will cite to its decisions in security clearance cases in support of legal propositions and principles that are pertinent to both security clearance cases and sensitive position cases. Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. An Administrative Judge's findings cannot be challenged based on claims about events that occurred after the close of the record below or after the Judge's decision was issued. By failing to submit a response to the File of Relevant Material, Applicant waived his right to present evidence for consideration by the Judge. Absent a showing of harmful error that prejudiced the appealing party's right to present evidence, the appealing party is not entitled to a remand solely to allowing him or her another chance to present evidence. Adverse sensitive position decision affirmed.


Financial

05/02/2001

Forty-three year old Applicant's financial problems stemming from a business failure, which resulted in both business and personal bankruptcies in August 2000, as well as a federal tax liability to the IRS in the amount of $32,308.44, were mitigated by the conditions which caused the bankruptcies (they were business related); the isolated nature of the problem; and the fact that he initiated good faith efforts to resolve the indebtedness, and actually paid it off approximately 30 days prior to the hearing. Clearance granted.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

05/01/2001

Applicant's statements about his intent or state of mind when he completed a security form are relevant and material information, but they are not binding on the Administrative Judge. Judge's credibility determinations are entitled to deference on appeal and the appealing party has a heavy burden of demonstrating a Judge's credibility determination is unsustainable. A Judge must consider all the evidence, both favorable and unfavorable, and decide whether the favorable evidence outweighs the unfavorable evidence or vice versa. Falsification of a security form provides rational basis for an adverse security clearance decision. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

04/25/2001

Fifty-one year old Applicant's continuing history of not meeting her financial obligations, including long-standing accounts charged off or sent to collection, despite an apparent ability and repeated declared intentions to pay them off by the end of December 2000, accompanied by her subsequent inaction, with few exceptions, raises grave questions and doubts as to her security eligibility and suitability. Clearance is denied.


Alcohol; Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

04/23/2001

Board need not address Administrative Judge's findings and conclusions that are not appealed. Board does not review the record evidence de novo and it must give deference to the Judge's credibility determinations. An applicant has the burden of presenting evidence to extenuate or mitigate conduct that is admitted or proven. However, absent a finding that an applicant engaged in alleged conduct, there is nothing an applicant needs to extenuate or mitigate. Harmless errors by Judge do not warrant reversal or remand. Favorable decision affirmed.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

04/23/2001

Applicant has failed to demonstrate the Administrative Judge's findings about his history of financial difficulties are erroneous. Decisions by Hearing Office Judges are not binding on the Board, and they are not binding on their Hearing Office colleagues. Isolated sentence in Judge's decision that would be consistent with a favorable decision does not detract sufficiently from the Judge's overall adverse findings and conclusions to warrant reversal or remand. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial

04/19/2001

Procedural provisions of DoD Directive 5220.6 are applied in processing trustworthiness cases adjudicated under DoD Regulation 5200.2-R. There is a rebuttable presumption that quasi-judicial officials are impartial and unbiased, and the appealing party has a heavy burden when seeking to overcome or rebut that presumption. Given the record evidence in this case, the Administrative Judge had a rational basis for concluding Applicant's history of unresolved financial difficulties warranted a conclusion that Applicant is not eligible for a sensitive ADP position. Adverse decision affirmed.


Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

04/10/2001

Administrative Judge erred when he relied on provision of DoD Directive 5220.6 that prohibits the Board from accepting new evidence on appeal to justify his decision to exclude a document submitted by Applicant. Record evidence supports the Judge's findings and conclusions about Applicant's conduct. Considering the proceedings after remand, the concerns that led to remand of this case on the first appeal are no longer warranted. Adverse decision affirmed.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

04/04/2001

Administrative Judge had discretion in setting a deadline for allowing a post-hearing submission. Even in the absence of a cross-appeal, the non-appealing party is entitled to urge affirmance of the decision below on the basis of any matter supported by the record, even if the argument relies on matters overlooked, ignored, not relied on, or even rejected by the lower tribunal. ASDC3I memo concerning possession and use of foreign passports is applicable to this case. Adverse decision affirmed on alternate grounds.


Alcohol

03/22/2001

A word or phrase in Directive that is not defined must be construed or interpreted in a reasonable manner. In deciding whether alcohol-related incidents indicate a pattern, it is reasonable for an Administrative Judge to consider the passage of time between the incidents. Record evidence in this case does not indicate Applicant engaged in binge drinking. There is no presumption of error below and the appealing party has the burden of demonstrating such error. Favorable decision affirmed.


Financial; Personal Conduct

03/21/2001

Applicant's argument for an alternate interpretation of the record evidence is not sufficient to demonstrate the Administrative Judge's findings are erroneous. When an applicant is legally responsible for financial obligations and debts incurred by a spouse or dependents, then those obligations and debts can be taken into account when assessing an applicant's security eligibility under Guideline F. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial

03/21/2001

Board does not review isolated sentences in a decision; rather it will read the Administrative Judge's decision in its entirety to determine what findings the Judge made and what conclusions the Judge reached. Board will not construe or interpret provisions of the Directive in a manner that leads to foolish or absurd results. Judge is not required to discuss Financial Considerations mitigating conditions when there is no record evidence to support their application. It is possible for a series of otherwise individually harmless errors to reach a point that their cumulative effect would preclude a conclusion that the errors are harmless. When considered individually or cumulatively, the Judge's errors in this case do not warrant remand or reversal in light of the record evidence as a whole. Applicant's history of unresolved financial difficulties provides a sufficient basis for the Judge's adverse conclusions under Guideline F. Adverse decision affirmed.


Criminal Conduct

03/19/2001

Not every variance between Statement of Reasons and an Administrative Judge's findings and conclusions is fatal. When applicant challenges such a variance on appeal, the Board must review the record as a whole to determine whether the applicant (a) received fair notice of the issues being raised, (b) had a reasonable opportunity to litigate the issues raised, and (c) has demonstrated he was harmed in a prejudicial manner. As trier of fact, the Judge must draw reasonable inferences and reach reasonable conclusions that take into account the totality of the record evidence. Even a single criminal act may be sufficient to raise security concerns. Appealing party has heavy burden of overcoming rebuttable presumption that quasi-judicial officials are impartial and unbiased. Applicant's challenges to the Judge's impartiality and his findings and conclusions lack merit. Adverse decision affirmed.


Drugs; Alcohol

03/15/2001

Twenty-four year old Applicant's improper and illegal drug abuse, essentially consisting of the regular and sustained use, purchase, and possession, of marijuana over a four year period culminating in May 1999, motivated by social pleasures--purportedly a common and socially accepted activity among his peers, and because marijuana relaxed him; his regular abuse of alcohol, until May 1999, to the point of intoxication, and in some instances, blackouts; his continued heavy drinking of similar quantities of alcohol but doing so less frequently; as well as his perceived lack of candor regarding his substance abuse, raise grave questions and doubts as to his security eligibility and suitability. Clearance is denied.


Financial

03/13/2001

Thirty year old Applicant's continuing history of not meeting his financial obligations, including long-standing accounts charged off or sent to collection, and the ensuing liens, judgments, and garnishments, despite an apparent ability or proclaimed willingness and intent to satisfy them, accompanied by his subsequent failure to do so, with few exceptions, mostly made upon receipt of the SOR, raises grave questions and doubts as to his security eligibility and suitability. Clearance is denied.


Misuse of Information Technology; Personal Conduct

03/12/2001

Board will consider only those claims of factual error that appealing party raises with specificity. It would be arbitrary and capricious for an Administrative Judge to uncritically accept a witness's testimony without regard to whether it is plausible and consistent with other record evidence. Judge erred by overlooking relevant record evidence. Even in the absence of a formal briefing on computer security, there was record evidence that Applicant knew or should have known his actions were not authorized and that they violated basic principles of computer security. An applicant who recklessly violates basic computer security principles poses a security threat that is not extenuated or mitigated by the absence of a sinister motive. Judge erred by not evaluating Applicant's conduct under Guideline E independently of his conclusions under Guideline M. Favorable decision reversed.


Drugs

03/08/2001

Board does not measure an Administrative Judge's decision against a standard of perfection. Board does not review isolated sentences of a Judge's decision; rather, the Board reads a Judge's decision as a whole to discern what findings the Judge is making and what conclusions the Judge is reaching. Applicant's history of marijuana use provided a rational basis for the Judge's doubts about her suitability for a security clearance. Adverse decision affirmed.


Personal Conduct

03/07/2001

Thirty-eight year old Applicant's pattern of employer rule violations pertaining to the confidentiality and privacy of sensitive hospital patient information by wrongfully accessing computer files; his subsequent discharge for those actions; and the current absence of credible evidence of rehabilitation, raise grave questions and doubts as to his security eligibility and suitability. Clearance is denied.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

03/07/2001

Record evidence supports the Administrative Judge's finding that Applicant falsified his security questionnaire. Applicant's history of unresolved financial problems and his falsification of the security questionnaire provide a rational basis for the Judge's decision. Adverse decision affirmed.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

02/27/2001

Under Directive, the ASDC3I has authority to establish adjudicative standards, oversee the application of such standards, and issue clarifying guidance and instructions. ASDC3I memo on foreign passports supersedes prior Board rulings concerning possession and use of foreign passports. Unresolved doubts should be resolved in favor of national security, not the applicant. Executive Order 10865, Section 7 precludes consideration of an applicant's loyalty in DOHA proceedings. Favorable decision reversed.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

02/23/2001

Actions taken to revoke an applicant's access to classified information after issuance of adverse decision by Administrative Judge are taken by DoD personnel outside scope of Board's jurisdiction and authority. Memorandum by ASDC3I on foreign passports is applicable to Applicant's case. Board does not have authority or discretion to ignore or disregard guidance provided by ASDC3I pursuant to Section 5.1 of Directive. DOHA proceeding is not a proper forum to raise federal civil rights claims. Applicant has burden of demonstrating applicability of mitigating conditions. Security clearance decisions are not limited to consideration of an applicant's conduct and circumstances while the applicant holds a security clearance. A decision to grant a security clearance to an applicant does not give the applicant any vested right or entitlement in keeping a security clearance. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

02/16/2001

The Applicant was less than candid with the Government as to her $14,000.00 of past due indebtedness. This wilful falsification is a violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 1001. Clearance Denied.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

02/16/2001

Applicant's appeal arguments fail to demonstrate the Administrative Judge's findings about Applicant's falsification conduct are erroneous. Applicant's appeal arguments fail to demonstrate the Judge's conclusions about Applicant's falsification conduct are arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law. Adverse decision affirmed.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

02/14/2001

There is no right to reconsideration; rather, the Board has the sole discretion to decide whether to exercise its inherent authority to reconsider one of its decisions. Board cannot consider new evidence offered in support of a request for reconsideration. Adverse effect that an unfavorable security clearance decision might have on an applicant or an applicant's family is not relevant to determining whether the applicant is suitable person to be granted access to classified information. Request for reconsideration denied.


Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

02/14/2001

When record contains conflicting evidence, the Administrative Judge must carefully weigh the evidence and make findings that reflect a reasonable interpretation of the evidence. Record evidence supports Judge's finding that Applicant falsified a security questionnaire. Rules of evidence and burdens of proof associated with criminal proceedings are not applicable in DOHA proceedings. Falsification of a security questionnaire can constitute criminal conduct wholly independent of the criminality of the conduct being concealed. Adverse decision affirmed.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

02/13/2001

It was arbitrary and capricious for the Administrative Judge to fail to consider Applicant's response to the File of Relevant Material. Absent a showing of harmful error that affects a party's right to present evidence in the proceedings below, a party does not have any right to have a second chance at presenting its case before a Judge. Party is not entitled to have case reopened to allow the introduction of evidence that comes into existence after the close of the record. Applicant waived her right to a hearing. Applicant's pro se status did not relieve her of the obligation to take timely, reasonable steps to protect her rights under Executive Order 10865 and DoD Directive 5220.6. Unfavorable decision remanded with instructions.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

02/08/2001

ASDC3I guidance concerning adjudicative standards supersedes any interpretation of those standards by a Hearing Office Administrative Judge or the Board. No jurisdiction or authority to adjudicate civil rights claims in DOHA proceedings. Application of ASDC3I memo concerning foreign passports does not violate Ex Post Facto Clause or Due Process Clause of U.S. Constitution. Judge's decisions failed to address significant aspects of the case. There is no presumption in favor of granting a security clearance. Government is entitled to consider security significance of Applicant's conduct and circumstances after Applicant became a naturalized U.S. citizen. Judge failed to articulate rational explanations for his favorable conclusions. Favorable decision reversed.


Foreign Influence; Foreign Preference

01/30/2001

Deference owed to credibility determinations does not preclude Board from considering whether inferences and conclusions Judge drew from testimony are arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law. Under whole person concept, Judge must assess totality of applicant's conduct and circumstances, not consider them in a piecemeal manner. Department Counsel does not have the burden of demonstrating it is clearly consistent with national interest to deny or revoke security clearance. Judge's conclusions under Guidelines B and C are arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law. ASDC3I memo has superseded prior Board decisions concerning possession and use of foreign passport. Favorable decision reversed.


Outside Activities

01/29/2001

Nothing in the plain language of Guideline L requires that the foreign country in question have interests that are inimical to the interests of the United States. Federal government is entitled to protect classified information from any person, organization, or nation not authorized to receive it, regardless of whether that person, organization, or nation has interests inimical to those of the United States. Nonappealing party can argue for affirming Administrative Judge's decision on any grounds supported by the record even if the argument relies on matters overlooked, ignored, not relied on, or even rejected by the Judge. Unless an applicant meets his or her ultimate burden of persuasion under Item E3.1.15 of the Additional Procedural Guidance, a Judge must resolve any security concerns in favor of the national security. Adverse decision affirmed.


Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

01/26/2001

Department Counsel has burden of proving controverted facts. Administrative Judge's findings were sustainable even though Department Counsel could argue for an alternative interpretation of the record evidence. Favorable decision affirmed.


Financial; Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

01/05/2001

Board cannot consider new evidence on appeal. Administrative Judge's findings and conclusions cannot fairly be challenged on the basis of evidence that was not made available during the proceedings below. The totality of Applicant's conduct and circumstances provide rational basis for Judge's security clearance decision. Adverse decision affirmed.


Personal Conduct; Criminal Conduct

01/04/2001

There is no authority to entertain personal appearances before the Board or hear oral argument on appeal. Persons in sensitive ADP positions must be held to high standards because their positions give them access to important, sensitive information on government computers. Making false oral or written statements to federal government provides a rational basis for deciding an applicant is not eligible for assignment to sensitive duties under DoD Regulation 5200.2-R. Adverse decision affirmed.


Foreign Preference; Foreign Influence

01/03/2001

Act of taking oath of allegiance and becoming a naturalized U.S. citizen does not preclude consideration of an applicant's conduct and circumstances afterwards. ASDC3I memo supersedes Board precedent on use of foreign passports based on legal necessity. Board does not have jurisdiction or authority to pass judgment on wisdom or desirability of guidance provided by the ASDC3I. Board does not have jurisdiction or authority to entertain challenges to the wisdom or legality of provisions of DoD Directive 5220.6. Adverse decision affirmed.


SECURITY VIOLATIONS

09/14/2001

Applicant mitigated the Guideline K concern. The minor, inadvertent security violations at issue here were a result of Applicant's workload, the lax security culture that his employer previously fostered, and sharing office space with others who, at times, willingly violated the security rules knowing Applicant would be held responsible. None of the violations resulted in the compromise of classified information, and the last security incident occurred over three years ago. Applicant has since changed the behavior and attitude that led to the violations, and has become a role model in the handling of protected information. Clearance is granted. CASE NO: 07-06380.h1


« Return to DOHA Home Page
Other years: 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Last updated 25 Oct 2014