Summary
A 53-year-old retired Navy Captain with a master's degree in mechanical engineering was denied a security clearance under Guidelines D (Sexual Behavior) and E (Personal Conduct). The denial stemmed from a two-decade history of extramarital affairs and a lack of candor regarding these relationships.
Specifically, the applicant engaged in extramarital affairs between 1989 and 2010, which were concealed from his wife, military command, supervisor, and Facility Security Officer (FSO). This concealment created a vulnerability to exploitation due to the potential impact on his professional and personal standing if the affairs were disclosed.
Despite the applicant's military accolades and prior security clearance, the judge determined that his repeated misconduct over 20 years raised significant concerns about his judgment and trustworthiness. The applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient rehabilitation or commitment to counseling to mitigate these security concerns, leading to the denial of his security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant's history of extramarital affairs over a 20-year period raised serious doubts about his judgment and trustworthiness.
- The applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient rehabilitation or commitment to counseling to mitigate the security concerns.
- The applicant's lack of candor regarding his sexual behavior created vulnerability to exploitation.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 13(a)appliedSexual Behavior of a Criminal Nature
- AG ¶ 13(c)appliedSexual Behavior That Causes Vulnerability to Coercion
- AG ¶ 13(d)appliedSexual Behavior Reflecting Lack of Discretion or Judgment
- AG ¶ 16(e)appliedConcealment of Conduct Creating Vulnerability to Exploitation
- AG ¶ 14(b)rejectedBehavior Unlikely to Recur Due to Time Passed or CircumstancesThe applicant's frequent sexual misconduct was recent and cast doubt on his current trustworthiness.
- AG ¶ 14(c)appliedBehavior No Longer a Basis for CoercionThe applicant's past is no longer a basis for coercion, but his long history of concealment raises concerns.
- AG ¶ 14(d)appliedSexual Behavior Was Private and ConsensualThe applicant's affairs were discreet and consensual, but this was insufficient to mitigate disqualifying conduct.
- AG ¶ 17(e)appliedPositive Steps to Reduce Vulnerability to ExploitationThe applicant disclosed his conduct, but the long history of vulnerability remains a concern.
Key Rule Quoted
“A security clearance decision is intended only to resolve the question of whether it is clearly consistent with the national interest for an applicant to either receive or continue to have access to classified information.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedDec 23, 2009
- Answer filedFeb 11, 2010
- Hearing heldApr 20, 2010
- Decision dateAug 31, 2010
Cite For
- Security Concerns Related to Sexual Behavior Under Guideline D
- Lack of Candor and Personal Conduct Issues Under Guideline E
- The Importance of Demonstrating Rehabilitation and Trustworthiness in Security Clearance Cases