adjudication

I see this over and over in security clearance denial cases. The applicant fails to disclose something that in and of itself is not serious or disqualifying for clearance eligibility. However, by doing that they have now created a new issue that is potentially disqualifying under the adjudicative guidelines for

In perusing the Defense Office of Hearing and Appeals cases published from January through March of this year, I have noticed an uptick in the number of cases where the applicant has admitted to use of illegal drugs resulting in a denial of clearance eligibility. Out of 115 appeals, 44

Time and time again I read security clearance appeal cases where the applicant brings in supervisors or co-workers to testify on their behalf as to what a good worker they are to recommend getting a security clearance granted or reinstated. Although this is a factor in looking at the “whole

Another interesting Defense Office of Hearing and Appeals case caught my eye because it involved a systems administrator and installation and use of a Chinese made web browser on his government workstation. The DoD initially denied his clearance eligibility based on security concerns involving finances and use of information technology.