Loading case…

Summary

The applicant, a 31-year-old manufacturing engineer and Navy veteran, faced allegations under Guidelines J (criminal conduct), E (personal conduct), and D (sexual behavior) related to past incidents of alleged domestic assault and sexual misconduct. The administrative judge found that the applicant successfully refuted the allegations and demonstrated that the concerns were mitigated, ultimately granting him access to classified information.

Under Guideline D (Sexual Behavior), Guideline E (Personal Conduct), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant committed rape in 2010 (3.a). Applicant failed to disclose that he was charged with the felonies of rape and infliction of injury on his May 2, 2018 SCA (2.a). Applicant was arrested in March 2010 and charged with Rape of a Spouse and Willful Infliction of Corporal Injury (1.a). Applicant was arrested in February 2015 and charged with Domestic Assault (1.b). Applicant was arrested in December 2017 and charged with Domestic Assault (1.c).

The judge granted the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 31(a), AG ¶ 31(b), AG ¶ 16(c), AG ¶ 16(d), AG ¶ 13(a). The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 32(a), AG ¶ 32(c), AG ¶ 32(d), AG ¶ 17(c), AG ¶ 17(d), AG ¶ 17(e), AG ¶ 12(a). The decision turned on the following: The applicant credibly refuted allegations of rape and infliction of injury, with no charges ever filed against him; The domestic assault allegations were dismissed, indicating insufficient evidence for prosecution; The applicant's military service and subsequent rehabilitation efforts contributed positively to his case.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

• The applicant credibly refuted allegations of rape and infliction of injury, with no charges ever filed against him.
• The domestic assault allegations were dismissed, indicating insufficient evidence for prosecution.
• The applicant's military service and subsequent rehabilitation efforts contributed positively to his case.

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the adjudicative guidelines.”

Procedural Posture

• SOR issuedJun 14, 2019
• Answer filedJul 8, 2019
• Hearing heldOct 10, 2019
• Decision dateNov 8, 2019

Cite For

• Mitigation of Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J Due to Lack of Evidence and Time Elapsed
• Successful Rebuttal of Allegations Under Guideline E Through Credible Testimony
• Resolution of Sexual Behavior Concerns Under Guideline D Based on Refutation of Allegations.