Summary
A 40-year-old defense contractor and former military officer was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline M (Use of Information Technology Systems). The applicant was alleged to have intentionally provided false information to his commanding officer on multiple occasions regarding an adulterous affair with the wife of another officer in his unit. Additionally, he was accused of using a government computer and network to transmit and display offensive material, violating a military directive.
The judge cited the applicant's lack of candor and questionable judgment as primary reasons for the denial. Disqualifying conditions E2.a (deliberate omission or falsification of relevant facts), E2.b (deliberate deception or misrepresentation), and M2.e (unauthorized or inappropriate use of government information technology systems) were raised. While mitigating conditions E3.a (the individual made prompt, good-faith efforts to correct the falsification or omission) and M3.a (the misuse was an isolated incident) were considered, they were not sufficient to overcome the security concerns.
The denial was based on the applicant providing false information to his commanding officer about the affair, which created a vulnerability to exploitation and demonstrated a lack of trustworthiness. His conduct also involved the intentional misuse of government IT systems. Despite some positive character references and job performance, the security clearance was DENIED.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant provided false information to his commanding officer about his affair.
- The applicant's actions created a vulnerability to exploitation and demonstrated a lack of trustworthiness.
- The applicant's conduct involved intentional misuse of government IT systems.
Conditions Referenced
- E2.araisedPersonal Conduct
- E2.braisedPersonal Conduct
- M2.eraisedUse of Information Technology Systems
- E3.arejectedPersonal ConductThe applicant did not make prompt, good-faith efforts to correct the falsifications before being confronted.
- M3.arejectedUse of Information Technology SystemsThe conduct was intentional and not unlikely to recur.
Key Rule Quoted
“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for access to classified information will be resolved in favor of national security.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedMar 30, 2010
- Answer filedMay 12, 2010
- Hearing heldSep 30, 2010convened as scheduled on September 13, 2010
- Decision dateOct 12, 2010
Cite For
- Lack of Candor Under Guideline E
- Intentional Misuse of Government IT Systems Under Guideline M
- Questions of Reliability and Trustworthiness in Security Clearance Evaluations