Summary
A 63-year-old engineer with a defense contractor was granted a security clearance despite allegations under Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), K (Handling Protected Information), and L (Outside Activities). The allegations included multiple security violations between 1984 and 2003, such as failing to secure classified containers and areas, not accounting for a classified document, and transferring a classified document to an unclassified server. His container privileges were suspended for one year in 1985, and he received a five-day suspension without pay in 2003.
Additionally, the applicant was alleged to have omitted his sole proprietorship, which refurbished vintage aircraft, from his 2004 Security Clearance Application (SF 86). He also did not report this business, or his involvement with two procurement companies that supplied aircraft parts to foreign governments, to his employer. However, the judge found his explanation credible that he considered the proprietorship a hobby and not reportable, and that his outside activities did not conflict with his employment or have security significance.
The judge determined that the applicant's violations ceased in 2004, demonstrating a significant change in behavior. His explanations for past conduct were deemed credible, indicating no intent to violate regulations. Ultimately, the judge concluded that the applicant's past issues did not pose a current risk to national security, and the security clearance was granted.
Why the applicant prevailed
- The applicant's violations ended in 2004, indicating a significant change in behavior.
- The applicant provided credible explanations for his past conduct, demonstrating a lack of intent to violate regulations.
- The applicant's outside business activities were deemed not to conflict with his primary employment and lacked security significance.
Conditions referenced
- K.34(c)raisedFailure to Comply with Rules for the Protection of Classified or Other Sensitive Information
- K.34(g)raisedNegligent or Lax Security Habits That Persist Despite Counseling by Management
- K.34(h)raisedLoading, Drafting, Editing, Storing, Transmitting, or Otherwise Handling Classified Reports, Data, or Other Information on Any Unapproved Equipment
- K.35(a)appliedSo Much Time Has Elapsed Since the Behavior, or It Has Happened so Infrequently, or Under Such Unusual Circumstances, That It Is Unlikely to Recur and Does Not Cast Doubts on an Individual’s Current Reliability, Trustworthiness, or Good Judgment.
- E.2.2.2appliedThe Falsification Was an Isolated Incident, Was Not Recent, and the Individual Has Subsequently Provided Correct Information Voluntarily.
- E.2.2.3appliedThe Individual Made Prompt, Good-faith Efforts to Correct the Falsification Before Being Confronted with the Facts.
Key rule quoted
“A person seeking access to classified information enters into a fiduciary relationship with the Government based upon trust and confidence.”
Procedural posture
- SOR issuedFeb 20, 2004
- Answer filed—
- Hearing held—
- Decision dateOct 31, 2007
Cite for
- Mitigation of Past Security Violations Under Guideline K
- Credibility of Explanations for Personal Conduct Under Guideline E
- Consideration of Outside Business Activities Under Guideline L