Summary
A 49-year-old defense contractor was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct), Guideline J (Criminal Conduct), and Guideline K (Handling Protected Information). The Statement of Reasons detailed multiple security violations, including two instances in May 2003 where the applicant exited a secured area with a classified document and failed to report the second occurrence.
Further allegations included approximately eight instances between September 2006 and October 2007 of entering a classified area with an unapproved Blackberry device, which he also failed to report. The applicant also entered a classified area with an unapproved flash drive around February 15, 2007. Additionally, on two or three occasions between March 2003 and May 2004, he performed unauthorized virus scans on discs and uploaded the scanned data files onto the classified network, failing to report these violations as well.
The denial was based on the applicant's failure to disclose these multiple security violations on his application and his repeated negligence in handling classified information, which raised serious doubts about his trustworthiness and reliability. Despite mitigating factors such as his long tenure and character references, the judge found that his conduct was not sufficiently mitigated by subsequent training and positive performance evaluations.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant failed to disclose multiple security violations on his security clearance application.
- The applicant's repeated negligence in handling classified information raised serious doubts about his trustworthiness and reliability.
- The applicant's conduct was not sufficiently mitigated by his subsequent training and positive performance evaluations.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 34(b)appliedCollecting or Storing Classified or Other Protected Information at Home or in Any Other Unauthorized Location
- AG ¶ 34(g)appliedAny Failure to Comply with Rules for the Protection of Classified or Other Sensitive Information
- AG ¶ 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 Doubt on the Individual's Current Reliability, Trustworthiness, or Good Judgment
- AG ¶ 35(b)appliedThe Individual Responded Favorably to Counseling or Remedial Security Training and Now Demonstrates a Positive Attitude Toward the Discharge of Security Responsibilities
- AG ¶ 35(c)rejectedThe Security Violations Were Due to Improper or Inadequate TrainingThe applicant was aware of his security responsibilities despite some indication of inadequate training regarding specific procedures.
Key Rule Quoted
“"Security violations are one of the strongest reasons for denying or revoking access to classified information."”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedMay 25, 2011
- Answer filedJul 1, 2011
- Hearing heldOct 19, 2011
- Decision dateDec 15, 2011
Cite For
- Security Violations as Grounds for Denial Under Guideline K
- Impact of Personal Conduct on Security Clearance Eligibility Under Guideline E
- Mitigating Factors Related to Training and Awareness in Security Clearance Cases