ISCR Case 15-05020.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-05020.h1

grantedDec 15, 2017· Hon. Martin H. Mogul· hearing

Summary

A 50-year-old Computer Systems Analyst, who previously disclosed theft of government property and unauthorized access to sensitive information, was granted a security clearance. The Statement of Reasons (SOR) raised concerns under Guideline J (Criminal Conduct), Guideline K (Handling Protected Information), and Guideline M (Use of Information Technology).

The allegations included stealing thousands of dollars worth of computer equipment and software, including government-owned items, since 2001. The applicant was also alleged to have abused System Administrator privileges by accessing co-workers' personal files and emails, viewing unauthorized company pay scales, copying a 1,000-page proprietary document to take home, and leaving a computer terminal unattended while connected to the server. Further allegations included failing to document software uploads to government systems and installing government and employer software on personal computers without authorization.

Despite these concerns, the judge found that the applicant's past conduct occurred over 15 years ago, with no recurrence since 2011. The applicant demonstrated remorse, and positive character references and training supported current reliability. Based on these mitigating factors, the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant's criminal conduct occurred over 15 years ago, indicating successful rehabilitation.
The applicant demonstrated remorse for past actions and has not engaged in similar conduct since 2011.
Positive character references and training support the applicant's current reliability and trustworthiness.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

JraisedCriminal ConductThe applicant admitted to stealing government property and mishandling sensitive information.
KraisedHandling Protected InformationThe applicant accessed personal files and proprietary information without authorization.
MraisedUse of Information TechnologyThe applicant failed to adhere to IT security protocols.

Mitigating

JappliedCriminal ConductThe applicant's criminal conduct occurred over 15 years ago, and there is evidence of successful rehabilitation.
KappliedHandling Protected InformationSignificant time has elapsed since the applicant's misconduct, and there have been no violations since 2011.
MappliedUse of Information TechnologyMost of the applicant's conduct occurred in 2001, and there have been no violations for several years.

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 17, 2016
Answer filedOct 6, 2016
Hearing heldJan 12, 2017
Decision dateDec 15, 2017

Cite For

Successful Rehabilitation After Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Mitigating Factors for Mishandling Protected Information Under Guideline K
Time Elapsed Since Misconduct as a Mitigating Factor Under Guideline M

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant has stolen thousands of dollar’s worth of computer equipment and software from his employer since 2001, including United States Government owned items. The stolen items include a computer, camera, mouse cables, Microsoft Windows XP, etc.	For Applicant	Theft or Larceny	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur	Credited Passage of Time

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant has stolen thousands of dollar’s worth of computer equipment and software from his employer since 2001, including United States Government owned items. The stolen items include a computer, camera, mouse cables, Microsoft Windows XP, etc.

For Applicant

Theft or Larceny

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

Credited

Passage of Time

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶34)	Mitigating applied (¶35)	Mitigation
2.a	It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant abused his privileges as a System Administrator by accessing co-workers personal files, profiles and emails.	For Applicant	Unauthorized Disclosure	Admitted	(b) collecting or storing protected information in any unauthorized location (g) any failure to comply with rules for the protection of classified or sensitive information	(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…	—
2.b	It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant abused his privileges as a System Administrator by deliberately viewing information including company pay scales, salaries, etc., on his employer’s computer network that he had no legitimate business reason or authorization to view.	For Applicant	Unauthorized Disclosure	Admitted	(b) collecting or storing protected information in any unauthorized location (g) any failure to comply with rules for the protection of classified or sensitive information	(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…	—
2.c	It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant abused his privileges as a System Administrator by copying to a disk, and bringing it home to read without authorization, a one thousand page document, which contained proprietary information.	For Applicant	Unauthorized Copying of Information	Admitted	(b) collecting or storing protected information in any unauthorized location (g) any failure to comply with rules for the protection of classified or sensitive information	(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…	—
2.d	It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant failed to protect his computer terminal, and therefore his System Administrator privileges, from unauthorized access when he left his computer unattended and connected to the server on numerous occasions.	For Applicant	Failure to Safeguard or Secure	Admitted	(g) any failure to comply with rules for the protection of classified or sensitive information	(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…	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶34)

Mitigating applied (¶35)

Mitigation

2.a

It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant abused his privileges as a System Administrator by accessing co-workers personal files, profiles and emails.

For Applicant

Unauthorized Disclosure

Admitted

(b) collecting or storing protected information in any unauthorized location

(g) any failure to comply with rules for the protection of classified or sensitive information

(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…

—

2.b

It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant abused his privileges as a System Administrator by deliberately viewing information including company pay scales, salaries, etc., on his employer’s computer network that he had no legitimate business reason or authorization to view.

For Applicant

Unauthorized Disclosure

Admitted

(b) collecting or storing protected information in any unauthorized location

(g) any failure to comply with rules for the protection of classified or sensitive information

(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…

—

2.c

It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant abused his privileges as a System Administrator by copying to a disk, and bringing it home to read without authorization, a one thousand page document, which contained proprietary information.

For Applicant

Unauthorized Copying of Information

Admitted

(b) collecting or storing protected information in any unauthorized location

(g) any failure to comply with rules for the protection of classified or sensitive information

(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…

—

2.d

It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant failed to protect his computer terminal, and therefore his System Administrator privileges, from unauthorized access when he left his computer unattended and connected to the server on numerous occasions.

For Applicant

Failure to Safeguard or Secure

Admitted

(g) any failure to comply with rules for the protection of classified or sensitive information

(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…

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶40)	Mitigating applied (¶41)	Mitigation
3.a	It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant failed to adhere to Information Technology security protocol when he did not document all software and program uploads and/or installs to the United States Government computer systems.	For Applicant	Negligent IT Security Practice	Admitted	—	(c) the conduct was unintentional or inadvertent and was followed by a prompt, good-faith effort to correct the situation and notification to appropriate …	—
3.b	It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant took United States Government and employer software and installed it on his home computer and other computers without authorization.	For Applicant	Unauthorized Use of System	Admitted	—	—	—
3.c	It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant's conduct, set forth in subparagraphs 2.a. through 2.d., above, raises concern under Guideline M.	For Applicant	Unspecified IT Misuse	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶40)

Mitigating applied (¶41)

Mitigation

3.a

It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant failed to adhere to Information Technology security protocol when he did not document all software and program uploads and/or installs to the United States Government computer systems.

For Applicant

Negligent IT Security Practice

Admitted

—

(c) the conduct was unintentional or inadvertent and was followed by a prompt, good-faith effort to correct the situation and notification to appropriate …

—

3.b

It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant took United States Government and employer software and installed it on his home computer and other computers without authorization.

For Applicant

Unauthorized Use of System

Admitted

—

3.c

It is alleged in the SOR that Applicant's conduct, set forth in subparagraphs 2.a. through 2.d., above, raises concern under Guideline M.

For Applicant

Unspecified IT Misuse

Unknown

—

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

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES