Summary
This case concerns a 51-year-old defense contractor's application for security clearance reinstatement, which was ultimately denied. The denial was based on Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct), specifically due to the applicant's 1983 convictions for armed and unarmed robbery. These convictions resulted in a sentence of more than one year in prison.
Despite the applicant demonstrating rehabilitation and the absence of current security concerns, the judge was legally bound by 10 U.S.C. §986. This statute mandates the denial of a security clearance for any applicant sentenced to more than one year in prison. The judge noted that while the applicant had received a favorable adjudication in 1990, the law had since changed, now requiring denial based on the length of the original sentence.
Therefore, the application was denied because the applicant's past criminal conduct, specifically the armed robbery conviction and the resulting sentence exceeding one year, triggered the mandatory denial provision of 10 U.S.C. §986.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant was sentenced to more than one year in prison for armed robbery, which requires denial of clearance under 10 U.S.C. §986.
- The judge noted that the law has changed since the applicant's previous favorable adjudication in 1990, now mandating denial due to the length of the sentence.
Conditions referenced
- E2.A10.1.2.3raisedConviction in a Federal or State Court, Including a Court-martial, of a Crime and Sentenced to Imprisonment for a Term Exceeding One Year.
- E2.A10.1.3.6appliedThere Is Clear Evidence of Successful Rehabilitation.The applicant demonstrated rehabilitation and progress in therapy.
- E2.A5.1.3.1rejectedThe Information Was Unsubstantiated or Not Pertinent to a Determination of Judgment, Trustworthiness, or Reliability.The government did not establish that past misconduct retained its security significance.
Key rule quoted
“The statute requires that I not renew Applicant's clearance because he was sentenced to four to twenty-five years imprisonment, notwithstanding that he served substantially less prison time, completed his probation without incident, and had his civil rights restored shortly after completing his probation.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedOct 15, 2002
- Answer filedNov 12, 2002
- Hearing held—Decision made based on the record.
- Decision dateMay 6, 2003
Cite for
- Application of 10 U.S.C. §986 Regarding Criminal Conduct and Security Clearance Denial
- Impact of Prior Criminal Convictions on Current Security Clearance Eligibility
- Consideration of Rehabilitation in the Context of Statutory Requirements for Clearance Denial.