ISCR Case 02-24763.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 02-24763.h1

grantedJul 30, 2007· Hon. Charles D. Ablard· hearing

Summary

A 66-year-old defense contractor employee, with 44 years of security clearance, was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline K (Handling Protected Information). The Statement of Reasons detailed several incidents, including the removal and loss of classified documents from his home, and multiple instances between 1964 and 2003 of failing to secure classified materials or storage containers at his government office. Other allegations involved an email with classified data sent in 1997, incorrectly marking unclassified working papers as classified in 2001, and leaving classified material unsecured in an unapproved office space approximately two to three times per week between May 2002 and April 2003.

The applicant also faced scrutiny for inconsistent statements made to investigators. However, the judge determined that the applicant's actions were not deliberate. Mitigating factors included the infrequent nature of the past security violations and the significant passage of time since these incidents occurred.

The decision to grant clearance was further supported by the applicant's extensive history of holding a security clearance and his positive work reputation. The judge concluded that the applicant had successfully mitigated the security concerns raised under both Guideline E and Guideline K.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant demonstrated that past security violations were infrequent and mitigated by the passage of time.
Inconsistencies in statements were found not to be deliberate, mitigating concerns under Guideline E.
Applicant's long history of holding a security clearance and positive work reputation supported the decision.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A11.2.1raisedUnauthorized Disclosure of Classified Information
E2.A11.2.2raisedDeliberate or Multiple Violations Due to Negligence
E2.A5.1.1raisedConduct Involving Questionable Judgment or Lack of Candor
E2.A5.1.2.3raisedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information

Mitigating

E2.A11.1.3.1appliedInadvertent Violations
E2.A11.1.3.2appliedIsolated or Infrequent Violations
E2.A11.1.3.3appliedDemonstrated Positive Attitude Towards Security Responsibilities
E2.A5.1.3appliedNo Deliberate Intent to Mislead

Key Rule Quoted

“The objective of the security clearance process is the fair-minded, commonsense assessment of a person’s trustworthiness and fitness for access to classified information.”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 7, 2005
Answer filedAug 24, 2005
Hearing heldMay 31, 2007via in-person hearing
Decision dateJul 30, 2007

Cite For

Mitigation of Security Violations Over Time Under Guideline K
Non-deliberate Inconsistencies in Statements Under Guideline E
Whole Person Analysis in Security Clearance Determinations

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a–2.c	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).	For Applicant		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a–2.c

3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).

For Applicant

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶34)	Mitigating applied (¶35)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant removed classified documents from his government office, failed to properly protect it at his home, and lost some of those documents near his home when he left a zipper case containing the documents on top of his car as he was leaving to pick up a co-worker to go to an airport for a one-day trip.	For Applicant	Removed Classified to Personal Space	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt… (b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili… (c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions	—
1.b	In the 36 years between 1964 and 2000, Applicant on three to five occasions, or once every seven to ten years, failed to lock his classified storage container and/or left classified material on his desk at his government office overnight.	For Applicant	Failure to Safeguard or Secure	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt… (b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili… (c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions	—
1.c	This incident involved an email sent by Applicant in 1997 while a government employee that included some classified data which he did not know was classified. He did not originate the email but received it from another person and forwarded it to a third person.	For Applicant	Unauthorized Disclosure	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt… (b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili… (c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions	—
1.d	This incident occurred in 2001 when he was employed by his present employer. He marked some working papers that were unclassified with some classified numbers thus creating a classified document if taken in context.	For Applicant	Improperly Compiled or Used Protected Info	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt… (b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili… (c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions	—
1.e	This incident occurred in May 2002 when he left his office for only a minute to talk to a colleague without securing his classified storage container in violation of company rules and in violation of the NISPOM.	For Applicant	Failure to Safeguard or Secure	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt… (b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili… (c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions	—
1.f	This allegation relates to alleged conduct during a one year period between May 2002 and April 2003 when he left classified material unsecured in his office which had not been approved for storage of such approximately two to three times per week when prohibited by company rules and the NISPOM.	For Applicant	Failure to Safeguard or Secure	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt… (b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili… (c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions	—
1.g	This incident occurred in 2001 when he was employed by his present employer. He marked some working papers that were unclassified with some classified numbers thus creating a classified document if taken in context.	For Applicant	Improperly Compiled or Used Protected Info	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt… (b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili… (c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions	—
1.h	This incident occurred in May 2002 when he left his office for only a minute to talk to a colleague without securing his classified storage container in violation of company rules and in violation of the NISPOM.	For Applicant	Failure to Safeguard or Secure	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt… (b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili… (c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶34)

Mitigating applied (¶35)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant removed classified documents from his government office, failed to properly protect it at his home, and lost some of those documents near his home when he left a zipper case containing the documents on top of his car as he was leaving to pick up a co-worker to go to an airport for a one-day trip.

For Applicant

Removed Classified to Personal Space

Admitted

—

(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt…

(b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili…

(c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions

—

1.b

In the 36 years between 1964 and 2000, Applicant on three to five occasions, or once every seven to ten years, failed to lock his classified storage container and/or left classified material on his desk at his government office overnight.

For Applicant

Failure to Safeguard or Secure

Admitted

—

(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt…

(b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili…

(c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions

—

1.c

This incident involved an email sent by Applicant in 1997 while a government employee that included some classified data which he did not know was classified. He did not originate the email but received it from another person and forwarded it to a third person.

For Applicant

Unauthorized Disclosure

Admitted

—

(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt…

(b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili…

(c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions

—

1.d

This incident occurred in 2001 when he was employed by his present employer. He marked some working papers that were unclassified with some classified numbers thus creating a classified document if taken in context.

For Applicant

Improperly Compiled or Used Protected Info

Admitted

—

(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt…

(b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili…

(c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions

—

1.e

This incident occurred in May 2002 when he left his office for only a minute to talk to a colleague without securing his classified storage container in violation of company rules and in violation of the NISPOM.

For Applicant

Failure to Safeguard or Secure

Admitted

—

(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt…

(b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili…

(c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions

—

1.f

This allegation relates to alleged conduct during a one year period between May 2002 and April 2003 when he left classified material unsecured in his office which had not been approved for storage of such approximately two to three times per week when prohibited by company rules and the NISPOM.

For Applicant

Failure to Safeguard or Secure

Admitted

—

(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt…

(b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili…

(c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions

—

1.g

For Applicant

Improperly Compiled or Used Protected Info

Admitted

—

(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt…

(b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili…

(c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions

—

1.h

For Applicant

Failure to Safeguard or Secure

Admitted

—

(a) so much time has elapsed, or it has happened so infrequently or under such unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur and does not cast doubt…

(b) responded favorably to counseling or remedial security training and now demonstrates a positive attitude toward the discharge of security responsibili…

(c) the security violations were due to improper or inadequate training or unclear instructions

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

SYNOPSIS

APPEARANCES

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES