Summary
A 35-year-old nuclear inspector was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline F (Financial Considerations), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant faced allegations including multiple criminal charges, such as several instances of driving with a suspended license, multiple DUI/DWI charges (with convictions in September 2013 for DUI and DWI first offense), illegally carrying a concealed weapon, and an arrest for a State Alcohol Safety Action Program (SASAP) violation. Additionally, he was charged with texting while driving, an HOV violation, speeding, and driving with an expired registration.
A significant personal conduct issue involved his failure to disclose on his security clearance application that he was fired in October 2017 for sexual harassment. Financial concerns included five student-loan debts totaling $31,425. While some financial issues were mitigated, the judge found the applicant's criminal conduct unmitigated.
The denial was based on the applicant's admitted multiple misdemeanors and his termination for sexual harassment, which raised doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness. His failure to disclose significant personal conduct issues on his application also indicated a lack of candor. The judge concluded that the applicant's criminal and personal conduct issues were substantial enough to warrant the denial of his security clearance.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant admitted to multiple misdemeanors, including DUI and a termination for sexual harassment, which raised doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness.
- The judge found that the applicant's failure to disclose significant personal conduct issues on his security clearance application indicated a lack of candor.
- Despite some mitigation of financial issues, the applicant's criminal conduct was deemed unmitigated.
Conditions referenced
- AG ¶ 31(a)raisedCriminal Conduct
- AG ¶ 31(c)raisedCriminal Conduct
- AG ¶ 16(a)raisedPersonal Conduct
- AG ¶ 20(e)appliedFinancial ConsiderationsThe applicant has a reasonable basis to dispute the legitimacy of the past-due debt which is the cause of the problem.
- AG ¶ 20(d)appliedFinancial ConsiderationsThe applicant has made good-faith efforts to repay overdue creditors or otherwise resolve debts.
Key rule quoted
“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the applicant meeting the criteria contained in the adjudicative guidelines.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedJan 4, 2021
- Answer filedApr 29, 2021
- Hearing heldFeb 4, 2022
- Decision dateApr 8, 2022
Cite for
- Unresolved Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
- Lack of Candor in Personal Conduct Under Guideline E
- Mitigation of Financial Issues Under Guideline F