ISCR Case 10-10726.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 10-10726.h1

deniedNov 9, 2012· Hon. Darlene Lokey Anderson· hearing

Summary

A 56-year-old structural engineer with 18 years of security clearance was denied a new clearance due to concerns under Guidelines D (Sexual Behavior), E (Personal Conduct), and J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant's history included an internet pornography addiction, which involved viewing adult images at work from 2000 to 2005, and, on at least one occasion, viewing underaged images, which he stated he immediately discarded. This behavior was linked to personal struggles, including a limited sexual relationship with his wife and loneliness, exacerbated by his son's illness in 2004.

The government alleged that this conduct indicated poor judgment, a potential personality disorder, and criminal activity. Disqualifying conditions cited included engaging in sexual behavior that involves a criminal offense, reflects a lack of judgment, and may subject the individual to undue influence.

Ultimately, the judge denied the clearance, finding that the applicant's past conduct, including viewing underaged images and repeated viewing of pornography at work, demonstrated poor judgment and unreliability. Despite the applicant's efforts at rehabilitation and abstinence, the judge concluded that more time in treatment was necessary to establish his responsibility and trustworthiness.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant engaged in internet pornography addiction at work, including viewing underaged images, which violated company policy and constituted criminal conduct.
The applicant's history of relapses and the severity of his past conduct raised significant concerns about his reliability and trustworthiness.
Despite some progress in treatment, the judge concluded that more time in rehabilitation was needed before the applicant could be deemed responsible and trustworthy.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E16(c)raisedCredible Adverse Information in Several Adjudicative Issue Areas
E16(d)raisedCredible Adverse Information Not Explicitly Covered Under Any Other Guideline
D13(a)raisedSexual Behavior of a Criminal Nature
J31(c)raisedAllegation or Admission of Criminal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“The adjudicative process is an examination of a sufficient period of a person’s life to make an affirmative determination that the person is an acceptable security risk.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 9, 2012
Answer filedMay 2, 2012
Hearing heldSep 19, 2012
Decision dateNov 9, 2012

Cite For

Denial Based on Internet Pornography Addiction and Criminal Conduct
Assessment of Reliability and Trustworthiness in Security Clearance Cases
Impact of Rehabilitation Efforts on Security Clearance Eligibility

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶13)	Mitigating applied (¶14)	Mitigation
2.a	The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because he has engaged in sexual behavior that involves a criminal offense, indicates a personality or emotional disorder, reflects a lack of judgment or discretion, or which may subject the individual to undue influence or coercion, exploitation, or duress.	Against Applicant	Criminal Sexual Conduct	Denied	(a) sexual behavior of a criminal nature, whether or not the individual has been prosecuted	—	—
2.b	The Applicant served on active duty in the United States Army from May 1982 to May 1985. He then served for a year in the Army reserves. He began working for his current employer in 1990, and has held a security clearance for eighteen years. (low confidence)	For Applicant	Unspecified Sexual Behavior	Unknown	—	—	—
2.c	He has been married for almost 25 years. His explained that his sexual relationship with his wife has always been limited. His wife suffers from some medical problems, and they have sex only once a month. Their sexual infrequency has been disappointing to the Applicant and over the years he has suffered from loneliness.	Against Applicant	Compulsive Sexual Behavior	Denied	(b) a pattern of compulsive, self-destructive, or high-risk sexual behavior that the individual is unable to stop	—	—
2.d	To mask his pain, he self-medicated himself by viewing pornography and masturbating which became an addiction.	Against Applicant	Compulsive Sexual Behavior	Denied	(b) a pattern of compulsive, self-destructive, or high-risk sexual behavior that the individual is unable to stop	—	—
2.e	He stated that while accessing adult pornographic sites at work he also viewed child pornography, but immediately discarded them.	Against Applicant	Child Pornography Involvement	Denied	(a) sexual behavior of a criminal nature, whether or not the individual has been prosecuted	—	—
2.f	From 2000 to 2005, he continued to view pornography, namely images of nude adult women several times a week at work. He testified that at that time he was looking for oral sex.	Against Applicant	Compulsive Sexual Behavior	Denied	(b) a pattern of compulsive, self-destructive, or high-risk sexual behavior that the individual is unable to stop	—	—
2.g	In 2004, his youngest son, who was nine years old at the time, became ill with a tumor, that required an operation. It took his son about six years to fully recover. When his son got sick, the limited sex that he and his wife did have ceased completely, as her focus turned to their son. (low confidence)	Against Applicant	Unspecified Sexual Behavior	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶13)

Mitigating applied (¶14)

Mitigation

2.a

The Government alleges that the Applicant is ineligible for clearance because he has engaged in sexual behavior that involves a criminal offense, indicates a personality or emotional disorder, reflects a lack of judgment or discretion, or which may subject the individual to undue influence or coercion, exploitation, or duress.

Against Applicant

Criminal Sexual Conduct

Denied

(a) sexual behavior of a criminal nature, whether or not the individual has been prosecuted

—

2.b

The Applicant served on active duty in the United States Army from May 1982 to May 1985. He then served for a year in the Army reserves. He began working for his current employer in 1990, and has held a security clearance for eighteen years. (low confidence)

For Applicant

Unspecified Sexual Behavior

Unknown

—

2.c

He has been married for almost 25 years. His explained that his sexual relationship with his wife has always been limited. His wife suffers from some medical problems, and they have sex only once a month. Their sexual infrequency has been disappointing to the Applicant and over the years he has suffered from loneliness.

Against Applicant

Compulsive Sexual Behavior

Denied

(b) a pattern of compulsive, self-destructive, or high-risk sexual behavior that the individual is unable to stop

—

2.d

To mask his pain, he self-medicated himself by viewing pornography and masturbating which became an addiction.

Against Applicant

Compulsive Sexual Behavior

Denied

(b) a pattern of compulsive, self-destructive, or high-risk sexual behavior that the individual is unable to stop

—

2.e

He stated that while accessing adult pornographic sites at work he also viewed child pornography, but immediately discarded them.

Against Applicant

Child Pornography Involvement

Denied

(a) sexual behavior of a criminal nature, whether or not the individual has been prosecuted

—

2.f

From 2000 to 2005, he continued to view pornography, namely images of nude adult women several times a week at work. He testified that at that time he was looking for oral sex.

Against Applicant

Compulsive Sexual Behavior

Denied

(b) a pattern of compulsive, self-destructive, or high-risk sexual behavior that the individual is unable to stop

—

2.g

In 2004, his youngest son, who was nine years old at the time, became ill with a tumor, that required an operation. It took his son about six years to fully recover. When his son got sick, the limited sex that he and his wife did have ceased completely, as her focus turned to their son. (low confidence)

Against Applicant

Unspecified Sexual Behavior

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
1.a–3.a	9 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (8 against, 1 for the applicant).	Mixed		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

1.a–3.a

9 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (8 against, 1 for the applicant).

Mixed

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a–3.a	9 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (8 against, 1 for the applicant).	Mixed		—		—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a–3.a

9 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (8 against, 1 for the applicant).

Mixed

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Was Denied

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

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION