Summary
A 39-year-old manager of engineering operations was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline K (Handling Protected Information), and Guideline M (Use of Information Technology). The Statement of Reasons cited conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or unwillingness to comply with rules, as well as deliberate or negligent failure to comply with rules for handling protected information. Specific allegations included unauthorized access to patient medical records from 2009 through 2011 at Employer A, and unauthorized access to proprietary human resource information at Employer C.
The administrative judge found that the applicant admitted to unauthorized access of sensitive information on multiple occasions. This demonstrated a pattern of questionable judgment, which also included illegal downloading of media. Furthermore, the applicant's lack of disclosure regarding his past actions undermined his credibility and trustworthiness.
Despite evidence of personal growth and training, the judge concluded that the applicant's past actions raised significant doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness. Consequently, the security clearance was denied.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant admitted to unauthorized access of sensitive information on multiple occasions.
- The applicant demonstrated a pattern of questionable judgment, including illegal downloading of media and accessing protected information without authorization.
- The applicant's lack of disclosure regarding his past actions undermined his credibility and trustworthiness.
Conditions referenced
- AG ¶ 40(a)raisedUnauthorized Entry Into Any Information Technology System
- AG ¶ 40(e)raisedUnauthorized Use of Any Information Technology System
- AG ¶ 34(d)raisedInappropriate Efforts to Obtain or View Protected Information Outside One’s Need to Know
- AG ¶ 16(d)raisedCredible Adverse Information That Is Not Explicitly Covered Under Any Other Guideline
- AG ¶ 41(a)rejectedSo Much Time Has Elapsed Since the Behavior Happened, or It Happened Under Such Unusual Circumstances, That It Is Unlikely to RecurThe applicant's actions were not isolated incidents and demonstrated a pattern of rule violations.
- AG ¶ 35(a)rejectedSo Much Time Has Elapsed Since the Behavior, or It Has Happened so Infrequently or Under Such Unusual Circumstances, That It Is Unlikely to RecurThe applicant's repeated unauthorized access to sensitive information undermined the applicability of this condition.
- AG ¶ 17(c)rejectedThe Offense Is so Minor, or so Much Time Has Passed, or the Behavior Is so Infrequent, or It Happened Under Such Unique Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to RecurThe applicant's actions were serious and not minor offenses.
- AG ¶ 17(d)rejectedThe Individual Has Acknowledged the Behavior and Obtained Counseling to Change the BehaviorWhile the applicant sought counseling, the severity and frequency of past actions raised ongoing concerns.
Key rule quoted
“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedJul 19, 2023
- Answer filedAug 8, 2023
- Hearing heldFeb 22, 2024Hearing was convened as scheduled.
- Decision dateJun 5, 2024
Cite for
- Denial of Security Clearance Due to Unauthorized Access to Sensitive Information
- Pattern of Questionable Judgment Impacting Trustworthiness
- Importance of Full Disclosure in Security Clearance Evaluations